Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Epsom Urban District Council Bill [Lords] (King's Consent signified),

Bill read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Gas Light and Coke Company Bill [Lords] (King's Consent signified),

Bill read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Trowbridge, Melksham, and District Water Board Bill [Lords],

Bead the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

BOROUGH.

Mr. DAY: 1.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of persons whose claims, during the previous 12 months, have been rejected by the insurance officer at the Walworth Road, Borough, Exchange?

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Miss Bondfield): The only cases in which disallowance is imposed by insurance officers are those relating to trade disputes, and separate statistics of such decisions are not available in respect of individual local offices. During the period 10th June, 1930, to 8th June, 1931, 5,079 claims to benefit made at the Borough Exchange were disallowed by courts of referees. This figure relates to claims to benefit and not to separate individuals.

Mr. DAY: Are statistics of separate individuals kept?

Miss BONDFIELD: No.

Mr. HANNON: There is no complaint of any sort or kind against this officer?

Miss BONDFIELD: None at all.

AGRICULTURAL WORKERS (INSURANCE).

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: 3.
asked the Minister of Labour whether she is in a position to make any statement about the proposal to bring agricultural workers within the scope of unemployment insurance, now that the interim report, Cmd. 3872, of the Royal Commission has been laid?

Miss BONDFIELD: The Commissioners indicate in their first report in paragraphs 6 and 9, that they propose to deal later with the question whether industries or occupations at present outside the scheme should be brought within it. Evidence from the agricultural industry was taken last week.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: Seeing that we have had an interim report about married women, for example, would it not be possible to get an interim report about the position of agricultural labourers?

Miss BONDFIELD: I do not think it would be.

Mr. HORE-BEL1SHA: Does the answer mean that the right hon. Lady is going to accept the recommendation of the Commission on that particular point, or have the Government a policy of their own?

Miss BONDFIELD: It obviously means that the Government will consider any report before it comes to a decision.

Lieut. - Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: Is there any use whatever in having interim reports if the Government do not intend to act on them?

BUILDING TRADE.

Mr. McGOVERN: 8.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of building trade workers who were unemployed on 1st June, 1931, and the total cost per week in unemployment benefit?

Miss BONDFIELD: The number of insured persons in the building industry recorded as unemployed on the 18th May, 1931, the latest date for which statistics of unemployed by industries are available was 144,447. Accounts are not kept
of benefit paid in separate trades but assuming that the average rates for men and boys applied to this trade the approximate cost would be £135,000 for the week.

Mr. McGOVERN: In view of the urgent necessity of working-class houses, will the right hon. Lady draw the attention of the Government to the fact that it would be better to employ unemployed builders on building houses than to spend that amount of money on them?

BENEFIT DISALLOWED, PARKHEAD.

Mr. McGOVERN: 9.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of persons refused benefit at Parkhead Employment Exchange from 1st June, 1930, to 1st June, 1931, and how many were women?

Miss BONDFIELD: During the 12 months ended 8th June, 1931, 2,243 claims to benefit made at the Parkhead Employment Exchange were disallowed by courts of referees, including 850 claims made by women and 60 by girls. During the same period a total of 37,988 fresh and renewal claims were made at this local office. The figures relate to claims to benefit and not separate individuals.

Mr. McGOVERN: In view of the fact that a growing number of applicants are being refused benefit, will the right hon. Lady consider setting up another commission to consider the abuses against applicants? May I have an answer to my question?

Miss BONDFIELD: The answer is "No."

Mr. BUCHANAN: In view of the figures, which disclose serious anomalies against the workers, will the right hon. Lady, before she introduces a Bill to abolish anomalies, introduce a Bill to abolish the anomalies against the workers?

Mr. SPEAKER: Mr. Mander.

Mr. McGOVERN: On a point of Order. I desire to ask the right hon. Lady if she is prepared——[Interruption.]

Mr. SPEAKER: That is not a point of Order.

Mr. McGOVERN: I am asking for an answer.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member has had a reply to his supplementary question.

RELIEF WORK, STOKE-ON-TRENT.

Mr. KINLEY: 11.
asked the Minister of Labour whether she is aware that the city council of Stoke-on-Trent, on 5th February last, passed a resolution, which has since been operative, that no unemployed person who had at any time received workmen's compensation should be employed upon State-assisted relief work; whether such action has the approval of her Department or of the Unemployment Grants Committee; and what action she proposes to take to prevent such a condition being imposed?

Miss BONDFIELD: This is a matter within the discretion of the local authority and I have no power to intervene. I do not understand that the rule laid down by the Council excludes a man who has completely recovered from his injuries.

WEST MIDDLESEX SEWAGE SCHEME.

Mr. MESSER: 13.
asked the Minister of Labour how many men it is estimated will be employed on the West Middlesex sewage scheme; and when it is expected the work will be started?

Miss BONDFIELD: It is estimated by the engineer to the Middlesex County Council that the scheme in question will employ an average of 2,800 men for five years, and that work will be actively commenced on, or before, 31st October next.

UNDERGROUND RAILWAY (SOUTHGATE EXTENSION).

Mr. MESSER: 14.
asked the Minister of Labour how many men are employed on the extension of the Tube railway north of Finsbury Park; and how many persons are estimated to be employed on the manufacture of the materials used in the construction?

Miss BONDFIELD: The latest returns record 1,944 men as directly employed on 29th May last on the Southgate extension of the Underground Railway. At least an equal number of persons may be regarded as employed indirectly in connection with the scheme in the manufacture of materials or otherwise.

ALEXANDRA PALACE (RECONSTRUCTION).

Mr. MESSER: 15.
asked the Minister of Labour how many men it is estimated
will be employed on the work of reconstructing the Alexandra Palace; and when it is expected the work will be started?

Miss BONDFIELD: This proposal has not yet reached the stage of formal application to the Unemployment Grants Committee, and I am therefore unable to give these details.

COURT OF REFEREES, ISLINGTON (CHAIRMAN).

Mr. R. S. YOUNG: 18.
asked the Minister of Labour the name of the chairman of the court of referees who officiate at Holloway Road, Islington, Employment Exchange, the number of cases heard since the beginning of this year, and the number of claims disallowed?

Miss BONDFIELD: The sittings of this court during the period 13th January to 8th June, 1931, were presided over either by the chairman, Mr. F. J. Kershaw, or by Mr. J. C. Adams, a reserve chairman. During the period 1,803 cases were considered by the court and 1,482 were disallowed.

Mr. YOUNG: If the Minister happens to have any reason to think that these decisions are unjust, has she any power to intervene?

Miss BONDFIELD: I have power to bring any new facts before the courts.

BEDWAS COLLIERY, MONMOUTH.

Sir F. HALL: 19.
asked the Minister of Labour the amount of unemployment benefit that has been paid to the miners who ceased work at the Bedwas Colliery, Monmouthshire, on the 6th November, 1930; whether she is aware that, on the 1st December, these miners were offered the same wages and conditions of labour as are operating in similar collieries in the neighbourhood; what are the average adult wages earned by miners in the district; and whether, as the men have declined to return to work on the conditions offered, she will consider the advisability of withdrawing all further unemployment insurance benefits from them?

Mr. LAWTHER: I beg to ask your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, whether this question is in order, having regard to the fact that this has been a subject of an umpire's ruling, which is held to be above the law and final?

Mr. SPEAKER: There are many questions in this House of the same sort, and they have generally been allowed.

Mr. LAWTHER: When an umpire's decision has been given, is it not beyond the power of any Member to raise a question, or for the Minister to interfere, because the umpire has statutory powers?

Mr. SPEAKER: I have often heard questions of that kind put.

Miss BONDFIELD: The amount of benefit paid to these men could not be ascertained without detailed and laborious investigation, which I hardly feel justified in undertaking. An offer of re-employment was made shortly after the stoppage in November, and, following on its refusal by the men, a decision was given by the umpire allowing benefit. I am not in possession of the figures asked for in the third part of the question. As regards the last part of the question, I have no power to withdraw benefit; the right to receive benefit is decided by the statutory authorities.

Sir F. HALL: Is it not a fact that about £120,000 is being expended on unemployment benefit in this instance, and why cannot the right hon. Lady give the information? Is it that she does not want to give it?

Miss BONDFIELD: Not at all. It is not possible, without individual investigation in each case, to say specifically how much benefit has been paid to each man, but, if the hon. and gallant Member will be satisfied with an approximation, I will endeavour to get the information.

Sir F. HALL: I should be quite satisfied, and I will put down another question next week.

Mr. McSHANE: Can the right hon. Lady induce the hon. and gallant Member to go down and explain that at a mass meeting of men?

WOMEN, YORK.

Mr. LONGBOTTOM: 20.
asked the Minister of Labour if she can give the number of women signing on as unemployed at the York Employment Exchange during the weeks ending 6th June and 13th June, 1931?

Miss BONDFIELD: The number of women on the register of the York Employment Exchange was 804 at 1st June and 844 at 8th June, 1931.

SERVICE CANTEEN VACANCIES, YORK.

Mr. LONG BOTTOM: 21.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of vacancies for counter hands at the Army, Navy, and Air Force Institute, York, reported to the 25 Employment Exchanges in the vicinity of York; and the number of unemployed persons whose benefit has been stopped because of their refusal to accept such vacancies during the present year?

Miss BONDFIELD: I am having inquiries made and will communicate the result to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

Major MACKENZIE WOOD: 22.
asked the Minister of Labour if she can state to what extent unemployment at present obtains among workers in France, Germany, Italy, and the United States, respectively?

Miss BONDFIELD: The latest information in my possession is given on page 235 of the June issue of "The Ministry of Labour Gazette," published to-day, of which I am sending a copy to the hon. and gallant Member.

APPROVED SCHEMES, CUMBERLAND.

Mr. PRICE: 5.
asked the Minister of Labour whether she is aware that a condition of 75 per cent. of ex-service men is demanded for work on Government-assisted schemes in the Whitehaven and Cleator Moor areas of Cumberland; and whether she can see her way to reduce this required percentage?

Miss BONDFIELD: The Unemployment Grants Committee have power in appropriate cases to authorise a reduction in the percentage of ex-service men to be employed on approved schemes, and have in fact done so for schemes promoted in the areas of the Cleator Moor Urban District Council and the Whitehaven Rural District Council.

Mr. PRICE: Is the right hon. Lady aware that in the mining areas of Cumberland there is a large number of men who were working in the mines during the War and that, in consequence, there is a very small number of
ex-servicemen in that area and it is very difficult to obtain the percentage?

Miss BONDFIELD: Yes, I have explained that in fact such reductions in these percentages have been made in these two schemes.

Oral Answers to Questions — JOINT INDUSTRIAL COUNCILS.

Mr. MANDER: 7.
asked the Minister of Labour to what extent assistance is being rendered to joint industrial councils; in how many cases representatives of her Department regularly attend meetings; and how many such attendances were made during the past year?

Miss BONDFIELD: In addition to the services that are available to all joint bodies by way of consultation and supply of information, assistance is given to the councils by the provision of accommodation for meetings and by the appointment of liaison officers. Officers of the Department attend the meetings of 45 joint industrial councils. During 1930, 122 such attendances were made.

Oral Answers to Questions — WASHINGTON HOURS CONVENTION.

Mr. MANDER: 10.
asked the Minister of Labour if she has any statement to make with reference to the comments made by the director of the International Labour Office in his annual report for 1931 concerning the failure of Great Britain to ratify the Washington Eight Hours Convention?

Miss BONDFIELD: A statement on behalf of the Government was made on this subject by the Parliamentary Secretary of the Ministry of Labour to the International Labour Conference at Geneva on 4th June. This statement was noticed in the Press and will appear in the account of the proceedings of the Conference which will be presented in due course to the House.

Mr. MANDER: Is it not a fact that there is a great deal of truth in the criticism of the director at the unjustifiable delay of the Government in ratifying the Washington Hours Convention?

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is it not a fact that there is no truth in the criticisms of the Government?

Oral Answers to Questions — PORT LABOUR (REPORT).

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 17.
asked the Minister of Labour whether she will lay the report of the Committee on Port Labour (the Maclean Committee) as a Parliamentary Paper?

Miss BONDFIELD: The report referred to is already on sale as a Stationery Office publication, and copies can be obtained by hon. Members on request.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: In view of the great importance of this matter, cannot we have it circulated to all Members in the usual way, or put in the Vote Office?

Mr. HANNON: Is it not a waste of Parliamentary time to put down such a question as this?

Oral Answers to Questions — ALIEN SEAMEN.

Mr. CAMPBELL: 25.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware of the frequent desertion at the docks of alien Asiatic seamen shipped on homeward-bound British vessels; and whether, as these alien seamen compete in an already overcrowded market, he will state what steps his Department propose to take to make these men amenable to the law?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Short): According to the information in possession of my right hon. Friend, such desertions are not frequent. The records for the year 1930 show that 33 coloured alien seamen were reported as deserters. My right hon. Friend is satisfied that all proper vigilance is exercised by the immigration officers and the police in this matter. When an alien deserter is traced, steps are taken under the Aliens Order to remove him from the United Kingdom.

Earl WINTERTON: I take it the hon. Gentleman is not using the term "alien" as applying to British Indian subjects?

Mr. SHORT: No.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 62.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the approximate number of aliens and Asiatics, respectively, employed in merchant ships on the British register at the present time; and how many of the Asiatics so employed are of non-British nationality?

Mr. GILLETT (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department): On the 31st March, 1930, the number of foreign seamen (other than lascars) employed on that date in sea-trading vessels registered at ports in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands was 14,433, and the number of lascars (British subjects and foreigners) was 52,682. The number of lascars who were of non-British nationality is not known.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRANSPORT.

SLOW-MOVING TRAFFIC (POLICE WARNINGS).

Mr. DAY: 26.
asked the Home Secretary whether he will give the number of persons who have been reported and dealt with by caution in the Metropolitan Police district for the 12 months ended to the last convenient date, for contravention of the by-law which exists with regard to slow-moving traffic keeping near the kerb?

Mr. SHORT: No persons were reported during the year ended 31st December last for contravention of the by-law referred to, but during the same period, 163 cases of interrupting free passage of the highway and 18 causes of failing to keep to the left or near side were reported under the Highway Act, 1835.

Mr. DAY: Were they all dealt with by separate warnings?

ROAD SERVICE LICENCES.

Mr. REMER: 53.
asked the Minister of Transport if his attention has been called to the expense incurred by the opposition by railway companies and large omnibu3 undertakings against the smaller omnibus owners before the Traffic Commissioners; and if he will take steps, in cases where these; applications are granted, to provide that they shall be granted for a period of years, or that no objections can be made on the same grounds in the annual application?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of TRANSPORT (Mr. Parkinson): My right hon. Friend's attention has not been called specifically to the matter referred to in the first part of the hon. Member's question. As regards the second part, I would point out that under the Road Traffic Act, 1930, a road service licence cannot continue in
force for a period exceeding 12 months, and that in exercising their discretion to grant or refuse an application for a fresh licence, the Traffic Commissioners are required to take into consideration any representations which may be made by persons who are already providing transport facilities along or near to any part of the proposed route.

Mr. REMER: Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that if the small omnibus owners have to make application every year, and are put to very serious expense, they will very soon go out of business altogether?

Mr. PARKINSON: Of course, but there is no obligation to engage counsel, and, after all, the licence is only granted for one year according to law.

Mr. REMER: Will the hon. Gentleman make representations to the commissioners to see what they can do to assist them?

PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES (CONDUCTORS).

Mr. REMER: 54.
asked the Minister of Transport if his attention has been called to the hardships caused in many instances by the regulation requiring that in every case there shall be conductors on omnibuses; if he is aware that this will mean the closing down of services in certain rural areas which are of great convenience to the travelling public; and if he will take steps to leave discretionary power with the traffic commissioners on those matters?

Mr. PARKINSON: No regulation has been made by my right hon. Friend requiring that in every case there shall be conductors on omnibuses. Regulation 14 of the Public Service Vehicle (Equipment and Use) Regulations requires that as from 1st August, 1931, where a public service vehicle is being used as a stage carriage a conductor shall be carried if the seating capacity of the vehicle exceeds 20 passengers, with the proviso that in the case of a single decked vehicle where no adult fare is less than 6d. no conductor need be carried if the seating capacity of the vehicle does not exceed 26.

PLATFORM ACCOMMODATION, TEBAY JUNCTION STATION.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: 56.
asked the Minister of Transport if his attention
has been called to the danger and inconvenience caused to passengers entering and alighting form the trains of the London Midland and Scottish and the London and North Eastern Railways at the Tebay Junction Station because of the depth from the carriages on to the platform; and will he draw the attention of the two companies with a view to a remedy being made?

Mr. PARKINSON: I cannot trace the receipt of previous representations in regard to this matter, but I will make inquiries and let my hon. Friend know the result.

Mr. RICHARDSON: Is my hon. Friend aware that this is a personal letter of my own to the London. Midland and Scottish Railway, and that I cannot get anything done; and is he also aware that at this station all passengers from the north eastern area must go round the other way and many of them are convalescents going to various homes in that area?

Mr. PARKINSON: I am not aware of the circumstances which have been stated by my hon. Friend, but I will cause further inquiries to be made.

ROAD EXPENDITURE.

Brigadier - General CLIFTON BROWN: 34.
asked the Minister of Health what was the ratio of rates to taxes in the cost of the maintenance and construction of highways in England and Wales in the last year for which statistics are available; and whether the cost to the rates of highways in country districts shows a higher ratio to taxes than in towns and cities?

The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Arthur Greenwood): As the answer contains a number of figures in tabular form I will, with the hon. and gallant Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The latest year for which statistics are available is the year 1928–29. The net expenditure on highways in England and Wales in that year was defrayed approximately as to 75 per cent. out of local rates and as to 25 per cent. out of Government grants.

In different classes of areas, the proportions were as shown below.

Class of Area.
Approximate proportion of net expenditure, other than capital expenditure, but including loan charges, falling on
Approximate proportion of capital expenditure falling on


Government Grants.
Rates.
Government Grants.
Receipts from loans and other capital receipts.



Per cent.
Per cent.
Per cent.
Per cent.


London
10
90
9
91


County Boroughs
12
88
17
83


Administrative Counties outside London:






Expenditure of:


(a) County Councils*
40
60
47
53


(b) Town Councils and Urban District Councils.
13
87
15
85


(c) Rural District Councils
26
74
32
68


* This expenditure is chargeable uniformly over the urban and rural areas in each county and cannot be allocated as between those areas.

In consequence of the transfer to county councils, under the Local Government Act, 1929, of the district roads in rural districts, and of all classified district roads in boroughs and urban districts, the proportion of the expenditure on highways which is chargeable uniformly over the urban and rural areas in a county will, as from the 1st April, 1930, be greatly increased.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOME OFFICE (INDUSTRIAL MUSEUM).

Mr. DAY: 27.
asked the Home Secretary whether he can state the number of visitors who have visited the Industrial Museum of the Home Office for the six months ended to the last convenient date; and can he state how many parties have availed themselves of visiting this museum during the same period?

Mr. SHORT: The number of visitors for the six months ended 31st May last was 2,667, including 80 parties.

Mr. DAY: Is the hon. Gentleman prepared to continue in the summer months the hours worked in the afternoon?

Mr. SHORT: I will consider that point.

Oral Answers to Questions — POLICE PENSIONS (BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS).

Mr. HORE-BF-LISHA: 28.
asked the Home Secretary whether his attention
has been called to the proceedings in bankruptcy against a former detective-inspector of the London City police, in which Mr. Justice Farwell, on the 28th May last, held on the application of the official receiver that the pension of the debtor was assignable for the benefit of his creditors; and whether he will state what action he is taking, in view of the fact that in pursuance of powers vested in the Home Secretary as police authority for Metropolitan Police officers, he issued a regulation in February, 1931, laying down that pensions were not assignable?

Mr. SHORT: The case referred to must, I think, be one which was decided in May, 1930. The matter turns not on any Regulations of the Secretary of State but on the provisions of the Police Pensions Act, 1921, and the Bankruptcy Acts. If the hon. Member has in mind the note which appears at the head of the Identity Certificate issued to Metropolitan Police pensioners, my right hon. Friend thinks that is correct in substance and so far as it goes, but he will consider whether it should be made more explanatory or otherwise modified.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I do not refer to that at all? I refer to regulations issued by the Home Secretary and dated February, 1931, a year after this case, in which he says that pensions are not assignable in cases of bankruptcy. In
spite of that this police officer's pension has been assigned. I ask the hon. Gentleman, therefore, whether the regulations issued by the Home Office are ultra vires?

Mr. SHORT: I understand that the matter does not turn upon the regulations; but having regard to the information the hon. Member has conveyed to me, I will have it inquired into again.

Oral Answers to Questions — EDUCATION.

TEACHERS' SALARIES.

Sir GEORGE PENNY: 29.
asked the President of the Board of Education whether he will state his reasons for refusing the National Association of Schoolmasters representation on the teachers' panel; and whether he can see his way to alter the constitution of the panel so as to include representatives of the National Association of Schoolmasters?

Commander SOUTHBY: 30.
asked the President of the Board of Education how many representatives of the National Association of Schoolmasters there are upon the teachers' panel of the Standing Joint Committee on the salaries of teachers in elementary schools?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Lees-Smith): I do not propose to give the National Association of Schoolmasters representation on the Standing Joint Committee on Salaries of Teachers in Elementary Schools. The National Union of Teachers represents the overwhelming majority of such teachers. The National Association of Schoolmasters is one of a number of minority associations, and in my view it would not add to the usefulness of the proceedings of the Committee if one or two members were added from each of these comparatively small associations.

Sir G. PENNY: Are not minorities to be protected? In view of the great discontent expressed by these bodies, will the right hon. Gentleman not reconsider his decision? It is far better to have a settlement about which everybody is agreed.

Sir F. HALL: Does not this association represent about 7,500 of these teachers, and is it not an important one?

Mr. LEES-SMITH: In the case of a body which is appointed to give me advice, it is far better that teachers should be represented by the association which represents the vast majority of the teachers.

Sir G. PENNY: But seeing that this organisation is deeply interested and will be affected, surely their representatives ought to be there to give some explanation of their case to the Minister?

Mr. LEES-SMITH: I do not think that is necessary. The other body is far more representative.

Sir GEORGE HAMILTON: Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that this is an association of schoolmasters without any schoolmistresses and wishes to represent the views of men teachers?

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (REORGANISATION).

Mr. MORLEY: 31.
asked the President of the Board of Education to what extent reorganisation into junior and senior schools has now taken place throughout the country?

Mr. LEES-SMITH: It is very difficult to describe in statistical form, or within the limits of a Parliamentary answer, the extent to which reorganisation in elementary schools has now been carried out. But I would refer my hon. Friend to the account of this matter given on pages 7–9 of the Board's Report for 1930, which indicates that on 31st March, 1930, about one-fifth of the children over 11 were in reorganised schools or departments: the proportion is now probably between one-quarter and a third.

Mr. MORLEY: Has this reorganisation led to diminution of the staff to any appreciable extent?

TEACHERS (INFIRMITY ALLOWANCES).

Mr. MORLEY: 32.
asked the President of the Board of Education if he can give the figures, classified according to age, of the number of teachers granted permanent breakdown allowances for the years 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927, 1928, 1929, and 1930, and the number of temporary breakdowns that occurred in those years?

Mr. LEES-SMITH: I regret that I have no information as to temporary breakdowns among teachers. As the information as to infirmity allowances awarded
under the Superannuation Acts in the years in question involves a number of figures I will, with the hon. Member's

Following is the information:


Infirmity Allowances awarded under the School Teachers Superannuation Acts.


Age Group
Year ended 31st March, 1925.
Year ended 31st March, 1926.
Year ended 31st March, 1927.
Year ended 31st March, 1928.
Year ended 31st March, 1929.
Year ended 31st March, 1930.
Year ended 31st March, 1931.


30–34
…
Figures, for separate age groups not available.
11
10
19
9


35–39
…
53
47
51
39


40–44
…
73
61
85
60


45–49
…
108
128
111
118


50–54
…
167
156
158
180


55–59
…
204
236
245
225


60–64
…
12
12
7
12


Total
…
700
661
670
628
650
676
643

Note.—No infirmity allowances were awarded under the age of 30, because teachers with less than ten years' service are not eligible for such allowances.

Mr. MORLEY: 58.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he can give the figures, classified according to age, of the number of teachers in Scotland granted permanent breakdown allowances for the years 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927, 1928, 1929 and 1930, and the number of temporary breakdowns that occurred in those years?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Westwood): I propose

Year ended 31st March.
Age at date of retirement.
Total.
Total Men and Women.


Under 30.
31–35.
36–40.
41–45.
46–50.
51–55.
56–60.




1925
Men
…
—
1
—
—
1
4
5
11
90


Women
…
7
7
11
7
10
17
20
79


1926
Men
…
2
—
1
1
1
5
4
14
77


Women
…
1
2
6
10
11
16
17
63


1927
Men
…
—
1
—
—
1
5
4
11
82


Women
…
2
5
11
12
14
17
10
71


1928
Men
…
—
—
—
1
2
3
3
9
67


Women
…
2
5
6
7
13
13
12
58


1929
Men
…
—
3
—
—
—
2
1
6
70


Women
…
—
3
6
15
11
10
19
64


1930
Men
…
1
2
2
1
1
—
4
11
75


Women
…
1
3
5
9
8
17
21
64


1931
Men
…
—
1
1
3
4
1
3
13
83


Women
…
1
3
6
12
13
16
19
70

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING.

EUKAL AREAS.

Sir KINGSLEY WOOD: 33.
asked the Minister of Health if he is now in a position to make a statement in relation to

permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

with my hon. Friend's permission, to circulate a table showing the number of teachers who, on retiring from service in Scotland during the last seven years, were granted disablement benefit under the superannuation scheme on the ground of permanent infirmity. No information is available as to the number of teachers who have been out of service on account of temporary incapacity.

Following is the table:

the housing proposals which have been the subject of conversations between the Government and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Penryn and Falmouth (Sir Tudor Walters)?

Mr. QUIBELL: 36.
asked the Minister of Health if he has further considered the problem of rural housing, and if he is now in a position to announce what new proposals he has to submit to the House for dealing with this problem?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I hope to be in a position to make a statement on the subject of rural housing at an early date.

Sir K. WOOD: Is the right hon. Gentleman not able to give a more specific statement, in view of the fact that public statements have already been made by the right hon. Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel)?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I am not aware of such statements.

Sir K. WOOD: I will send them, to you.

Mr. BROCKWAY: As, according to an earlier answer this afternoon, there are 140,000 building workers unemployed, will the Minister speed up these proposals and put them into operation as early as possible?

Mr. GREENWOOD: No time will be wasted, but I am afraid the process of rationalisation is going on in the building trade in common with other trades.

KENSIXGTON.

Mr. WEST: 44.
asked the Minister of Health whether he has received a revised programme of building under the Housing Acts for the Royal borough of Kensington; whether his attention has been drawn to a vacant site of 10 acres capable of providing accommodation for Kensington citizens at present living in defective houses; and whether he will consider acquiring this site for houses for his national housing scheme?

Mr. GREENWOOD: No formal revised programme has yet been submitted from this borough, but I am aware that the question of an extension of their programme is receiving active consideration. My attention has been drawn to the site mentioned by my hon. Friend but there is no power under which I could acquire and utilise that site in the manner suggested in the last part of the question.

PADDINGTON (LOCK HOSPITAL SITE).

Mr. WEST: 46.
asked the Minister of Health whether he has considered the representation sent to him from the Bishop of London's housing committee urging that a site of four acres in a crowded area of Paddington should be acquired for working-class dwellings by the Paddington Borough Council; and whether he has taken any action in the matter?

Mr. GREENWOOD: The question of the acquisition of this site has for some months been receiving the consideration of the Paddington Borough Council but no final decision has yet been reached.

Dr. MORGAN: 40.
asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the site of the Lock Hospital, Harrow Road, Paddington, is being offered for sale by public auction; whether he is aware of the need of tenement flats for the working classes in Paddington and of the suitability of this site; and whether, having regard to the fact that the Paddington Borough Council has not built, and does not intend to build, any houses, flats or tenements, he will consider the advisability of securing this plot of nearly four acres for houses for his national housing scheme?

Mr. GREENWOOD: The question of the acquisition of the site referred to has been under the consideration of the borough council for some time but I understand it is not only likely to be extremely expensive in itself but also, owing to its proximity to the Grand Junction Canal, to involve very high building cost. I have no power to take the action suggested in the last part of the question.

Dr. MORGAN: Seeing that there is a likelihood of this excellent site falling into the hands of speculative builders, if it is valuable for them for the building of working-class houses, would it not also be valuable for the local borough council for the same purpose?

Mr. GREENWOOD: Probably, if the dwellings could be let at rents within the incomes of working people.

Dr. MORGAN: Will the right hon. Gentleman see that this site comes under the proposed national housing scheme, which I understand is not only for rural but for urban housing?

GLASGOW.

Mr. STEPHEN: 59.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of condemned houses in the Camlachie Parliamentary Division of Glasgow which continue to be inhabited; how many slum-clearance houses are now being built to take their place; and the latest date on which closing orders for the old houses will be issued?

Mr. WESTWOOD: I am making inquiries into the matters referred to, and will inform my hon. Friend of the result in due course.

Mr. STEPHEN: Is the Under-Secretary aware that the facts are as stated in my supplementary question with regard to these houses?

Mr. WESTWOOD: I am having inquiries made on the point referred to in my hon. Friend's supplementary question, but up to the present moment I have not had a reply.

Mr. STEPHEN: Will the hon. Gentleman expedite the inquiry?

Mr. WESTWOOD: I always do all that I can to expedite inquiries.

Major ELLIOT: Will you prevent the hon. Gentleman from answering this question also?

Mr. SPEAKER: These questions have been passed at the Table.

Major ELLIOT: I was not in any way desiring to comment on the questions which have been passed at the Table, but merely on supplementary questions which have not been passed at the Table, and which arise out of those questions. If I have said anything which in any way seems to you inadvisable, I beg to withdraw and to apologise to you.

Miss LEE: Arising out of the original answer, is the hon. Gentleman aware that both in Glasgow and in the county of Lanark there are thousands of families now living in condemned houses, and will have to live in them for two or three years according to the present building
programme; and, although the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove (Major Elliot) may not think them important enough for a supplementary question—[Interruption.]

Viscountess ASTOR: Is the hon. Gentleman doing all that he promised in the direction of slum clearance?

Mr. WESTWOOD: The Noble Lady can rest assured that I am doing all that I can to fulfil every promise. [Interruption.]

HON. MEMBERS: Nothing!

Mr. SPEAKER: I think we might conduct these questions in a more orderly way.

Mr. STEPHEN: 60.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will consider making representations to the Glasgow Corporation to suggest a reduction in the rents of State-subsidised houses in the Camlachie Parliamentary Division of Glasgow, in view of the unemployment and resulting poverty of so many of the occupants of the houses?

Mr. WESTWOOD: I shall inquire into this matter and communicate later with my hon. Friend.

Oral Answers to Questions — NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE.

Sir K. WOOD: 35.
asked the Minister of Health whether he proposes to issue any further regulations or take other steps to protect the funds of approved societies against improper claims?

Mr. GREENWOOD: No further regulations are at present in contemplation, but my Department will continue to keep a careful watch over the expenditure of approved societies on sickness and disablement benefit, and will take any steps that may seem from time to time to be desirable in order to maintain a high standard of efficiency in medical certification and in the supervision of claims by societies.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Before, the right hon. Gentleman issues any regulations or letters, will he take steps, besides ascertaining the views of the approved societies, to find out the views of the people who will be victimised by those regulations or letters?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I am not aware that any insured person is being victimised. A large number of approved societies are very representative of these poor persons.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his last letter is a direct incitement to an approved society to cut people off from benefit?

Mr. GREENWOOD: No, not in any legitimate case.

Mr. BUCHANAN: rose——

Mr. SPEAKER: We cannot have an argument at Question Time.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I do not wish to involve myself in an argument, but I wish to ask the Minister whether before issuing his letter he consulted any person besides the approved societies who had made the complaint.

Mr. GREENWOOD: I consulted all sorts of approved societies, including trade union approved societies, who are directly responsible for insured persons.

Dr. MORRIS-JONES: Will the right hon. Gentleman circulate a report of the committee giving instances which are alleged to exist?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I will consider that, but the substance of the conclusions are contained in a memorandum which has already been issued.

Mr. ALPASS: 47.
asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that numbers of unemployed persons in Bristol have received information from their approved societies that unless the arrears of their National Health Insurance contributions are paid in full they will cease to be members of the societies for benefit purposes; and will he take steps to secure that insured persons shall not be deprived of benefits through unemployment?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I am not aware of the matter to which my hon. Friend refers, but if he will supply me with particulars of any case of which he has knowledge I will have it investigated and will inform him of the result. Under the National Health Insurance (Prolongation of Insurance) Act, 1930, an insured person can ordinarily avoid termination of insurance by reason of prolonged unemployment by proving within the time allowed for the purpose that he had in fact been available for but unable to obtain employment.

Oral Answers to Questions — LICENSED PKEMISES (ASSESSMENT).

Mr. SORENSEN: 42.
asked the Minister of Health whether he contemplates taking steps to amend the procedure of arriving at the assessment of licensed premises by requiring rated occupiers to produce to the rating authority their trade returns in order that a correct valuation of the property may be ascertained?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton East on 30th April, a copy of which I am sending him.

Oral Answers to Questions — PUBLIC HEALTH.

VACCINATION (INFANTS' DEATHS, LEICESTER).

Mr. FREEMAN: 43.
asked the Minister of Health whether he is yet in a position to report on the deaths of Peter and Pertia Furness, the four-years-old twins of Councillor A. B. Furness, of South Wigston, near Leicester, who were vaccinated on 14th May, and died on 29th and 30th May respectively; whether a post mortem has been held; and what was the result?

Mr. GREENWOOD: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. Post-mortem examinations have been undertaken in both cases, but until such examination has been completed it is not possible to make a full report on these cases.

Mr. FREEMAN: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what was the result of the doctor's report as to the cause of death?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I shall be in a position to give a more complete answer to that question after I have seen the results of the post-mortem examination.

Mr. FREEMAN: Will the Minister of Health also inquire into the circumstances immediately prior to the death of these children when the public vaccinator was called in to examine them, and will he say what report he made?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I think I have already answered that question.

IMPORTED TINNED MILK.

Mr. PERKINS: 61.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the value of tinned milk marked unfit for babies imported into this country from foreign sources during the last 12 months?

Mr. GILLETT: Under certain Public Health Regulations condensed skimmed milk imported into this country must be marked "Unfit for babies." Figures of the imports of milk so marked are not available, but the declared value of the total imports of sweetened condensed milk, separated or skimmed, registered as consigned from foreign countries was £2,691,513. The corresponding figure in respect of unsweetened condensed milk, separated or skimmed, cannot be stated.

Mr. PERKINS: Will the hon. Gentleman take steps to see that young children are fed on British fresh milk instead of this foreign milk?

Mr. R. S. YOUNG: Is it not a fact that milk which is marked "Unfit for babies" is really unfit for human consumption; and does not my hon. Friend consider that, as large numbers of poor people buy this milk, they should be protected?

Mr. GILLETT: I think that my hon. Friend must address a question of that kind to the Minister of Health.

Sir G. PENNY: Arising out of the original answer, will the hon. Gentleman try to obtain the figures showing the amount of this product that is imported into this country?

Mr. GILLETT: I will inquire further.

MILK (ADULTERATION).

Brigadier-General BROWN: 37.
asked the Minister of Health how many milk producers have been summoned under the Food and Drugs (Adulteration) Act in England and Wales during 1929 and 1930; in how many cases were convictions recorded, respectively; and whether he will reconsider the case put before him by the Agricultural Council of England and Wales for a revision of the law relating to the sale of milk in this respect?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I regret that the figures asked for are not readily available. I may say, however, that particu-
lars which were specially collected for the last quarter of 1927 showed that during that period there were 280 prosecutions in England and Wales for the sale of adulterated milk and that 200 convictions were recorded. I cannot say in what proportion of these cases the defandant was a producer. I have received a copy of the further report adopted by the Council of Agriculture for England on the law relating to the sale of milk and I will consider it in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries.

Mr. ALPASS: Is it not a fact that, in a large number of these cases, the penalties inflicted are nominal in comparison with the gravity of the offence?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I could not say that without notice, and I am not sure that I should be able to answer it in any case.

Brigadier-General BROWN: Is it not a fact that a prosecution may damage the reputation of a man when it is very likely not his fault at all?

Mr. YOUNG: I it not apparent, in view of the large increase of consumption among children, that inspection is inadequate?

Mr. GREENWOOD: That is not the only factor. I believe the quality of the milk is improving.

LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL HOSPITAL, CHELSEA.

Dr. MORGAN: 38.
asked the Minister of Health whether he can give the medical and nursing staff and the total number of beds in the London County Council hospital, Millman Street, Chelsea; and whether any investigation has been made into the complaints made by patients in that hospital?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I am informed that this hospital is under the administrative control of a medical superintendent, and a medical officer visits the hospital daily. There is a resident matron, a superintendent sister and 10 nurses. The number of beds is 50. I understand that only one complaint has been brought to the notice of the London County Council during recent months, and that on investigation this complaint was not considered to be justified.

Viscountess ASTOR: Has the right hon. Gentleman ever heard of a hospital in which there was not someone complaining?

Dr. MORGAN: 39.
asked the Minister of Health whether he can state the number of patients suffering from tuberculosis who have been removed from their London homes to the London County Council hospital, Millman Street, Chelsea, S.W., during the past six months; and what is the average duration of stay per patient?

Mr. GREENWOOD: I am informed that for the six months ended 31st May, 1931, the number of patients who were removed from their London homes to this hospital for the treatment of tuberculosis or for observation was 178, and that the average duration of stay of the patients discharged during this period was 56 days.

Dr. MORGAN: Is not the removal of tuberculous patients from one London area to such a district the most modern method of treating tuberculosis?

Mr. GREENWOOD: Not at all. I understand this hospital is used as a clearing house.

Dr. MORGAN: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think 56 days is too long a time for a clearing house?

Oral Answers to Questions — INCOME TAX.

RUSSIAN TRADING COMPANIES.

Commander BELLAIRS: 49.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, seeing that a general commission agent is liable to be assessed only on the profits which accrue on his commission while a particular agent must pay Income Tax on all profits resulting from sales, he can state why such Soviet State companies as Arcos, Centrosoyos, and Russian Oil Products, numbering 18 in all, are favoured by being classed as general commission agents when they are in fact particular agents of the Soviet Russian States?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence): There is no differentiation in favour of such companies as those named by the hon. and gallant Member, and there has been no change in their treatment, since they were first set up. In so far, how-
ever, as the profits earned through their agency are the profits of the Soviet Government, liability does not arise, and in this connection I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which I gave to a question asked by him on the 20th May.

MILITARY LANDS.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir A. LAMBERT WARD: 50.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether land owned by a unit of the Territorial Army for the purpose of military training only, and so used, is deemed to be land held for charitable purposes within the meaning attached to that phrase in the Income Tax Acts?

Mr. PETHICK - LAWRENCE: In general, exemption from Income Tax, Schedule A, is allowed in respect of land as referred to in the question either as Crown property or by reference to the provisions of the Income Tax Acts relating to charities.

ROYAL INFIRMARY, AND SIMPSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, EDINBURGH.

Duchess of ATHOLL: 48.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer on what grounds the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary and the Simpson Memorial Hospital, Edinburgh, are not regarded as educational establishments for training in respect of which a deduction is allowed off the Income Tax of the responsible parent?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: If the Noble Lady will let me have particulars of any case or cases in which the point referred to in the question has arisen, I shall be happy to make inquiries and to inform her of the result.

Oral Answers to Questions — GRAND OPERA (GOVERNMENT GRANT).

Sir K. WOOD: 51.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he proposes to submit the agreement providing for a subsidy to be paid to grand opera to the economy committee for their observations?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: As the terms of reference of the Economy Committee cover the whole of the Supply Services, there is no necessity for my right hon. Friend to invite their attention to any specific item.

Sir K. WOOD: Can we be assured that we shall have some observations from the Committee on this matter?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Clearly that is not for me to say, but for the Committee.

Sir K. WOOD: Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to see that that is done.

Duchess of ATHOLL: 67.
asked the Postmaster-General what representative or representatives of the British musical profession have been appointed to the committee which is to administer the opera subsidy; and what arrangements have been made to secure that the grant of the subsidy will result in the encouragement and assistance of British authors, composers, and executant artists?

The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Attlee): No committee has been appointed to administer the opera subsidy. The Government payment will be made to the British Broadcasting Corporation in order to assist them to finance the arrangements they have made with the Covent Garden Opera Syndicate (1930) for the performance of operas which the Corporation are to have the right to broadcast. Under these arrangements the syndicate undertake to employ first-class British and Continental artists; and the British Broadcasting Corporation have the right to be consulted on the choice of the operas to be performed. The Corporation can, I think, be relied upon to exercise their influence in the direction of employing British talent so far as this can be done consistently with the main object of the scheme.

Duchess of ATHOLL: Will the syndicate have the advice of any representatives of the musical profession?

Viscountess ASTOR: If the Government have money with which to subsidise opera, will they find money for the foundlings?

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

POOR LAW RELIEF, GLASGOW.

Mr. McGOVERN: 57.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will state the number of unemployed persons in Glasgow who have been assisted with their rent by the public assistance de-
partment from 1st January, 1930, to 1st June, 1931, and the total amount of assistance given?

Mr. WESTWOOD: Information for the period prior to 15th May, 1930, cannot readily be compiled as until that date there were nine Poor Law authorities in the City of Glasgow. The scale of assistance adopted by Glasgow Corporation for the relief of the destitute able-bodied unemployed is an inclusive scale covering rent as well as sustenance. During the period from 15th May, 1930, to 31st May, 1931, 22,833 able-bodied unemployed persons were assisted. The total amount paid to these persons for the period mentioned by my hon. Friend cannot at present be ascertained, but the cost of relief to this class for the year ended 15th May, 1931, was approximately £330,000.

Mr. McGOVERN: In view of that answer showing the number who have received the assessment during the latter period, will the hon. Member call the attention of the Government to the inadequate scale of relief paid to the unemployed whereby they cannot pay the rent of the houses which they occupy?

Viscountess ASTOR: Have the Government given to these people all that the Socialists promised them?

Mr. MORLEY: rose——

Viscountess ASTOR: The reason why I did not press my supplementary question was that I thought the Minister was going to answer it. May I have an answer?

Mr. SPEAKER: I should not have allowed the Minister to answer the question anyhow.

NEW FOREST (PONIES).

Mr. FREEMAN: 63.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade, as representing the Forestry Commissioners, whether he is aware that many wild ponies from the New Forest are being sold to slaughterers and that, unless this traffic is stopped, these ponies are in danger of extermination; and seeing that the report on National Parks recommends the preservation of the natural fauna, whether he will take the necessary steps to prohibit the sale or destruction of these animals?

Mr. ALPASS (for the Forestry Commissioners): The ponies referred to are not wild in the sense that they constitute part of the natural fauna of the New Forest. They are turned loose by private individuals into the open forest, the grazing of which is regulated by the verderers.

Mr. FREEMAN: Will my hon. Friend consider what steps can be taken to preserve these ponies from extermination, in view of the charm which they add to the life of the forest?

Oral Answers to Questions — WESTMINSTER HALL (LIGHTING).

Sir COOPER RAWSON: 64.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he will consider the rearrangement of the lighting of Westminster Hall or the addition of flood-lighting in order to display the tracery of the roof?

The FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS (Mr. Lansbury): I regret that I have no funds at my disposal with which to experiment on a scheme for flood-lighting, or otherwise to improve the lighting of Westminster Hall.

Sir C. RAWSON: In view of the floodlighted portrait of himself in to-day's "Daily Sketch," can the right hon. Gentleman deny similar advantages to a different kind of beauty in Westminster Hall?

Mr. LANSBURY: I am quite incapable of answering that question.

Oral Answers to Questions — TELEGRAPH POSTS, SHOREHAM.

Sir C. RAWSON: 65.
asked the Postmaster-General whether he will lower to the level of the railway track the tops of the 12 telegraph posts on the north side of the Southern Railway to the west of the bridge crossing the Adur at Shore-ham on the south of the Southern Aero Club's aviation ground, inasmuch as the telegraph wires involve danger to aeronauts and their passengers?

Mr. ATTLEE: I am informed that the posts in question are the property of the Southern Railway Company.

Sir C. RAWSON: Will the hon. Gentleman confer with the Southern Railway Company in regard to this matter?

Mr. ATTLEE: It is a matter for the railway company themselves; it has nothing to do with me.

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL INDUSTRY (AUTOMATIC GAS ALARMS).

Mr. ERNEST WINTERTON: 69.
asked the Secretary for Mines when he will be able to report to the House on the results of the tests of automatic gas alarms designed to detect where gas is present in coal mines in sufficient quantities to constitute a danger to the men working therein?

Mr. GILLETT: The further pit trials, of which the House was informed in reply to a question on 27th April, have been carried out; and a detailed report on the results by the Safety in Mines Research Board is in preparation. My hon. Friend will review the position as soon as he receives this report.

Oral Answers to Questions — ALDERSHOT CAMP (SEWAGE TREATMENT).

Mr. ANNESLEY SOMER-VILLE: 71 and 72.
asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether, in view of the continued pollution of the River Blackwater by Aldershot sewage, he will take steps to expedite the scheme for dealing with this sewage which has been held up by negotiations as to terms between the War Office and the Farnham Rural District Council;
(2) whether, in the interests of the purity of the water in the River Black-water into which the sewage of Aldershot is now discharged, and with reference to which the conservators of the River Thames served a statutory notice in 1926 on the Aldershot Corporation, he will take steps to expedite the negotiations for the treatment, of the sewage of Aldershot camp?

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. T. Shaw): The Army Council are fully aware of the urgency of the matter. The proposals of the Farnham Rural District Council are now under consideration, and every effort will be made to complete their examination as expeditiously as possible.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: Can the right hon. Gentleman give any idea of the additional length of time that will be necessary?

Mr. SHAW: No, I am afraid I cannot; but I can give the hon. Member a guarantee that, so far as we are concerned, the time will not be unduly extended.

Oral Answers to Questions — WAGES (PURCHASING POWER).

Mr. KINLEY (for Mr. BECKETT): 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether the fall in wages during the past year has been considered by the Cabinet; and whether, in order to safeguard the home market, any action is to be taken to prevent further decreases in purchasing power?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Ramsay MacDONALD): His Majesty's Government are watching with close attention every phase of the economic depression, including the downward tendency of money wages. Speaking generally, however, rates of money wages have fallen less than the cost of living, so that fortunately there has been no reduction in the purchasing power of wages over commodities.

Mr. BROCKWAY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that over 3,000,000 workers are now threatened with wage reductions and, in view of that fact, will the Government introduce legislation to prevent a lowering of their standards?

The PRIME MINISTER: That raises a different point from the original question, but it is covered by the answer I have given.

Mr. KELLY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that every one of the proposals for reduction is totally unwarranted?

The PRIME MINISTER: All I am asked to do in the question is to consider whether any action could be taken to prevent further decreases in purchasing power?

Miss WILKINSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the average reduction in the wages of co-operative society employés is only 2½ per cent. less than that of any other class of workers?

Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL NAVY.

VOCATIONAL TRAINING.

Mr. HORE-BEL1SHA: 73.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can give the numbers of higher engine-room ratings who requested to undertake vocational training courses; and how many were refused during the period 1st January to 31st March, 1931?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Ammon): I regret that this information is not available nor immediately procurable without a good deal of compilation. If the hon. Member has in mind particular cases and will communicate them, they could be looked into.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Is it the policy of the Admiralty to refuse vocational training to any of these ratings who desire to have it?

Mr. AMMON: If the hon. Member can bring any evidence of that we will look into it.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: I am asking what is the policy. Is it to refuse it or to give it?

Mr. AMMON: I have asked the hon. Member to substantiate the statement in his question.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that I will answer his question when I sit on that bench?

Mr. AMMON: I do not suppose the hon. Member or I will live long enough for that to happen.

HIS MAJESTY'S SUBMARINE "POSEIDON."

Sir G. PENNY (for Major Sir HERBERT CAYZER): 74.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will now announce the name of the senior rating of His Majesty's Submarine "Poseidon" to whom praise has been attributed by survivors for the coolness and presence of mind which he showed in organising rescue work: and what steps will be taken to recognise and reward his action?

Mr. AMMON: No statement can be made until a full report is received from the Commander-in-Chief, China.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS (BONUS).

Mr. KINLEY (for Mr. BECKETT),: 52.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what annual saving has been effected by the recent reduction in the bonus of lower grades of civil servants?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The total annual saving represented by a 10 points drop in the bonus of all civil servants is approximately £3,200,000.

Mr. BROCKWAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he is now prepared to consider postponing any further reduction until the report of the Commission?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The report is expected in the course of a very few weeks now, and therefore I do not think that the question of the hon. Member is really to the point.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Has the hon. Gentleman noted the answer which has just been given by the Prime Minister, that, although the Government are reducing wages, they are carefully watching the situation?

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Sir AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: May I ask the Prime Minister what business he proposes to take next week.

The PRIME MINISTER: Monday; Unemployment Insurance, Money Resolution, Committee stage.
Tuesday: Finance Bill, Committee [9th Allotted Day].
Unemployment Insurance Money Resolution, Report.
Wednesday: Finance Bill, Committee [10th Allotted Day].
Thursday: Supply [11th Allotted Day], Committee. The vote, I understand, will be announced later.
Friday: Unemployment Insurance (Borrowing Powers and Transitional Benefit) Bill, Second Reading.
On any day, should time permit, other Orders may be taken.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: May I ask the Prime Minister a further question about the proceedings upon the Finance Bill, because the arrangement he has just read
out appears to me to be a very inconvenient one. If we are to take the remaining two Committee days on Tuesday and Wednesday, instead, as we had anticipated, of on Monday and Tuesday, I presume that we shall not get the Bill printed in its amended form until Friday. I do not know when the Prime Minister is thinking of taking the Report stage of the Bill, but I assume that he must take it on the following Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. If so, it means that we shall have to hand in all Amendments to the amended Bill for the Report stage on the same day on which we get the Bill reprinted. That seems to leave a totally inadequate time to prepare and to draft and to hand in the Amendments.

The PRIME MINISTER: It is not the intention to take the Report stage on Monday week, but I am now in the position that I must manipulate somehow or other the two Bills with dates at the end of each, and the only way by which they can get through by the statutory time is the arrangement incorporated in the answer which I have just given.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: If the right hon. Gentleman is not taking the Report stage on Monday, I presume it is to be taken on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of that week, because there are three days. Is he proposing to take the Third Reading on the Friday? We shall not be able to get the Bill reprinted in time.

The PRIME MINISTER: We have gone very carefully into that matter, and I am informed that the Bill can be printed for Friday.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Surely, it is impossible to ask the House to take the Third Reading of the Bill on Friday, the Report stage of which may have only concluded between 10.30 and 11 o'clock on Thursday night, even if by keeping the printers up all night copies of the Bill in its amended form can be made available when the House comes down on Friday. I venture to say that such an outrage to the House has never been attempted before. I beg the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider his proposals for business next week and proceed as he has done hitherto, with the Committee stage of the Finance Bill until it is completed.

The PRIME MINISTER: If the right hon. Gentleman looks at the programme and considers it, he will find that it is a perfectly practical programme. It will be quite convenient to proceed with the whole of the programme.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I will put my point in a very simple question. Does the right hon. Gentleman think that it is for the convenience of the House that hon. Members should be asked to give the Third Reading to a Bill in the form which they see for the first time on the morning of the day on which they are asked to read it the Third time, especially when that day is a Friday on which the House meets at 11 o'clock and has to conclude its business at 4 o'clock?

The PRIME MINISTER: I certainly assumed that the House was very familiar with this Bill and that there really would be no inconvenience whatever. The Bill will be reprinted after the Committee stage, and it will be reprinted after the Report stage, and the complete Bill will be in the hands of Members in the ordinary time before discussion.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: To be asked to complete a Bill which hon. Members may have in their hands at 9 o'clock in the morning, is not treating the House fairly, and I protest most strongly against it. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will still reconsider the position. In the meantime, I want to ask him another question in regard to the Unemployment Insurance Money Resolution which he proposes to put down for Monday. Do the Government propose to make a full statement of their policy in presenting that Resolution to the House?

The PRIME MINISTER: We will take the very widest possible opportunity given to us on that Resolution to state what we are going to do. I understand that within the last few minutes a technical point has arisen. We wish the separate Bill, the anomalies Bill, should be in the hands of hon. Members to-morrow morning, and that means that the Bill will have to be introduced now, immediately the opportunity arises. It has been pointed out to me that that may act as a sort of block upon the width of the discussion on Monday. The Government have no intention whatever to do anything like that. We shall be only too glad if some arrangement can be
made, either through the good will and the good offices of the Chair or otherwise, to enable the Debate on Monday to be as wide as possible.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Obviously, as you will not be in the Chair, Mr. Speaker, we must consult the Chairman or obtain a Ruling from him as to what can be done in Committee. I think that the rule is perfectly plain. If the Bill is presented to-day, it will be impossible to discuss, on the Resolution on Monday, anything which is covered by the Bill. It will be impossible, therefore, for the Government to make a statement of their policy when asking the House for permission to borrow further money. Are we first to sanction the: borrowing of money and afterwards to hear for what purpose it is to be expended, or are we first to hear the policy of the Government and then decide what it is necessary to borrow? I suggest that the latter course is the only reasonable one and that it is another reason for not taking the Money Resolution of the Unemployment Insurance on Monday and for giving up that day to the continuation of the Finance Bill.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that it is very desirable that there should be a very wide discussion on Monday, because, obviously, we cannot discuss merely the question of borrowing except in reference to what is to be done with regard to the report of the Royal Commission. The Chair generally defers to the opinion of all sections of the House of Commons, and, if it were desired by all sections that there should be a very wide survey of the whole position, I should have thought that the Chair, following precedent, would permit it. I only suggest that as a possibility. It would be an advantage, undoubtedly, for the House to have not merely the Bill printed, but a discussion upon the Bill.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Hear, hear!

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: If we can get full particulars from the Government of what the Bill is, then on Monday I should think that, with the general consent of the House, we could survey the whole situation.

The PRIME MINISTER: The position is as the right hon. Gentleman has
stated it. The reason why we have been hurrying on with the Bill and why we intend to introduce it now is that the House may be in full possession of the policy of the Government regarding it before we discuss the Resolution on Monday.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: It will be in the hands of Members before Monday?

The PRIME MINISTER: We hope it will be in the hands of Members to-morrow morning. The Bill will be circulated as soon as the House authorises us to print it, but a technical point has arisen as to whether that will not have some sort of blocking effect. I want to make it perfectly plain that so far as we are concerned we desire the widest possible discussion on Monday, when we discuss the Resolution.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I submit that that really does not meet the case. Obviously, the proper course it to have the the Bill first and to consider the Money Resolution after the Bill, and not to vote the money first and to consider the Government's proposals afterwards. I think that all parties are agreed on that, the Prime Minister included. What the right hon. Gentleman suggests and what the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George) suggests is that, in the absence of the Chairman of Committees, the party leaders in the House should come to an arrangement that well-known Rules of the House should be abrogated on this occasion, and that we should take the Resolution and discuss what is quite clearly forbidden by the ordinary Rules of the House. Any hon. Member can stop that discussion. The Chairman may feel unable to grant it. We all know that at different times we have been limited in Debates where there has been a general desire to have a full discussion, because the Chairman felt himself governed by the Rules of the House, and obliged to apply them. In any case, I submit that it is improper to take the Money Resolution on Monday. If we are not to have the Finance Bill on Monday, the Government ought to take their Bill dealing with unemployment insurance on Monday and make a full statement of their policy on it, and discussion could then take place. Discussions of the Resolution would follow upon and be guided by that.

The PRIME MINISTER: With respect, I say that the right hon. Gentleman is wrong. If, as I gather from his words, he says that the Money Resolution refers to this Bill only——

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: No.

The PRIME MINISTER: Very well. The Money Resolution is required for a Bill which will provide solely for the continuation of unemployment benefit. A modification is going to be made upon that, and that is to be the subject of the Bill which we wish to introduce immediately. If the right hon. Gentleman thinks that it is improper for leaders of the various parties in the House to come to an agreement that when a subject is brought before the House they will unite in requesting the Chair to stretch some of the Rules of the House in order to meet the convenience of the House, well, I am afraid that he and I have to plead guilty to many such transgressions. I have been party to such an arrangement before, and I am setting no precedent in confessing openly that we are willing to become a party to a similar transaction again.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not say that it is improper for leaders of parties to unite in making a request to the Chairman, but I say that it is wholly impossible for any agreement among leaders of parties to bind the Chairman of Committees and that I have known occasions, and doubtless the right hon. Gentleman has known them, when the Chairman has not been able to agree to what the representatives of the parties thought they might require. It is impossible to bind the Chairman in his absence or when he is not in the Chair. The Government are getting the whole business of the House into a perfectly unnecessary tangle because they will not take the straightforward course of going on with the Finance Bill on consecutive days and later, when they have concluded the Committee stage of the Finance Bill asking the House to give a Second Reading to the Unemployment Insurance Bill in which they propose to define the purposes for which the money sought in the Money Resolution will be expended, thereby taking the Money Resolution when we are in a position to say whether the money ought to be borrowed, if so, how much, and with the knowledge of the purposes for which it is required.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: With regard to the Finance Bill, there is another Clause on the Order Paper to-day in the names of certain hon. Members of the Liberal party. It is clear that that Clause cannot be reached in time to give adequate discussion of it. Does the Chancellor of the Exchequer intend to put his own name to a Clause embodying the proposals of the Liberal party. If so, when will that Clause be put on the Order Paper, and will it be done in such a way as to ensure that adequate discussion will take place upon it. I think that was the understanding which the Chancellor of the Exchequer expressed, and I want to get it quite clear.

The PRIME MINISTER: I am sorry that I have had no notice of this question, and consequently no opportunity of consulting. I know that the Chancellor of the Exchequer made a statement regarding this point the other day. That statement holds good.

Sir WILLIAM MITCHELL-THOMSON: The point is, when shall we see the Chancellor of the Exchequer's Clause S Can the Prime Minister give us any idea on that matter? It is manifestly for the convenience of the whole Committee in considering the subject that, if possible, we should see that Clause before the week-end and that it should be put down to-morrow.

Sir ROBERT HORNE: May I ask whether or not the Government accept the Liberal Amendment?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: May I press the right hon. Gentleman to give us an answer to a very simple question? When shall we see the Amendment in the form which the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes to accept.

The PRIME MINISTER: I understand that he has pledged himself to deal with the matter by action for which he himself is responsible. That Clause or Amendment will be put down in plenty of time for its consideration.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (No. 3) BILL,

"to provide for the amendment, in relation to certain classes of persons, of the enactments relating to unemployment insurance with a view to the elimination of
anomalies in the operation of those enactments, and to provide for facilitating the removal of workers and their dependants from one place to another," presented by Miss Bondfield; supported by Mr. Shaw, Mr. Johnston, Mr. Greenwood, and Mr. Lawson; to be read a Second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 175.]

STANDING ORDERS.

Resolution reported from the Select Committee:
That, in the case of the Bethlem Hospital (Amendment) Bill [Lords], the Standing Orders ought to be dispensed with:—That the Bill be permitted to proceed.

Resolution agreed to.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to,—

Housing (Rural Workers) Amendment Bill,

Kincardine-on-Forth Bridge Order Confirmation Bill,

Ministry of Health Provisional Order (City of Worcester) Bill,

Ministry of Health Provisional Orders (Manchester and South Staffordshire) Bill,

without Amendment.

That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend the Law relating to the offices of clerk of the county council and clerk of the peace of counties and to persons holding those offices; and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid." [Local Government (Clerks) Bill [Lords].

Orders of the Day — FINANCE BILL.

Considered in Committee. [Progress, 17th June.]

[8TH ALLOTTED DAY.]

[Mr. DUNNICO in the Chair.]

CLAUSE 30.—(Application to Scotland.)

4.0 p.m.

Sir JOHN GILMOUR: I beg to move, in page 29, line 31, to leave out the words "(other than dwelling-houses)."
I move this Amendment under somewhat peculiar difficulties, as indeed is every one of the Amendments on the Paper to-day. I listened a 4.0 p.m. moment ago to the statement made by the Prime Minister as to some Amendments which are be moved to this Measure and which, he assured the House, would be available to Members of this House in ample time. But I find myself under this disability, that they will not be available to anyone in this House to form any conclusion or opinion while we are asked to-day to deal with a Clause which applies this part of the Bill to Scotland. I have often heard in this House complaint made as to the treatment of Scotland and the disabilities under which Scotland works in this Chamber, but in my experience, now well over 20 years, in this House I have never observed any circumstances in which Scotland and the interests of Scottish people of all ranks and classes have been so flagrantly disregarded as they have by the action of the Government in the present circumstances.

This Amendment which I bring to the notice of the Committee raises fundamentally the position of all agricultural land in Scotland. Is it to be said that the matters specifically dealt with are of such small account that we can, in a day, dispose of this Clause, which applies, in very curious circumstances, new methods of valuation and new impositions of taxation upon the citizens of my country? I am glad to observe that at least two members of His Majesty's Government representing the Scottish Office are upon the Front Bench. We have not in the past deliberations on
this Bill received much encouragement or interest from representatives of that office; indeed, they have been conspicuous by their absence. Admittedly under this Amendment and the Amendments which follow we are attempting to apply decisions on matters of principle and of fact to the peculiar circumstances arising in Scotland.

The difference of circumstances between holdings of agricultural land in England and in Scotland are, I think, well known to this Committee. I need go back no further than the somewhat lengthy discussions which took place in this House upon the Bating Act, for which I was responsible while at the Scottish Office. It is clear that the circumstances which govern rating principles in England and in Scotland are fundamentally different, and I observe, if I am correct—and I should like to have the Lord Advocate's view upon that particular point—that under Clause 27 agricultural land in England
includes any farmhouse, that is to say, a house occupied in connection with such land as aforesaid and used as the dwelling-house of the person who is primarily engaged in carrying on or directing agricultural operations on that land;

I do not know why that should be done in England and different treatment applied in Scotland. Of course, a farmhouse is a dwelling-house, and the system which we have pursued in Scotland has always been not only to include in the one unit the farmhouse, but the cottages of the farm-workers, and the valuation as it appears in the roll in Scotland includes all those units. Indeed, the farm is taken as a unit, and I think it will be admitted by those who know Scottish conditions that you cannot properly divorce from the working of the farm the house in which the farmer lives, and the houses in which the farm-workers reside. It is quite true that circumstances differ across the Border, but if the Government are really anxious to arrive at the proper agricultural value of a unit, surely that value is the value entered in the valuation roll of the rental of the farm inclusive of these buildings, which valuation, may I remind the right hon. Gentleman, is an annual valuation, and is in accord with the value placed upon it in an agricultural free market by those who work upon these units. I cannot think of any other system which is more direct, which is more fair, which is devised year
by year, which is open to inspection, which places in the hands of the Government for the time being, without entering into hypothetical values formed upon a basis which is, in the main, pure guesswork, but puts in the hands of the Government or the valuer a definite figure based upon actual facts.

It is very unfortunate that the Government have chosen to take the line which they have in this matter. Those who are interested in agriculture in Scotland are watching with very great anxiety what we may do here, but what is our position here to-day? What is the position of every farmer and smallholder in Scotland to-day? We do not) know what the Amendment, which was ruled out of order the other day, may be when it comes upon the Paper. We do not know in the least whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer is going to place his name in support of the Amendment in the form in which hon. and right hon. Members below the Gangway have endeavoured to bring it to the notice of the House. Therefore, we are entirely in the dark. We do not know how much exemption there is to be, and how far that exemption may go, what classes of people it is going to affect and what the result may "be. It is really an outrage that this House should be asked to deal with a problem of this kind in these circumstances. We are brought to the position that every farmer and every smallholder, while they have been assured, on a kind of broad basis, that they are going to escape if they have agricultural holdings, they do not know whether their land is going to be valued with or without the house. They do not know whether this kind of hypothetical value is clear of all buildings in one instance, and fences and hedges in another.

It is treating the agricultural industry, at a time when it is going through grave disabilities, with the greatest disrespect, and I would urgently ask the Government to consider whether they ought not to adopt the suggestion which my Amendment makes, that at least, whatever the further Amendments may bring in the way of relief to certain units, as far as agriculture is concerned in Scotland, we shall proceed by the usual, recognised and well-established methods of long standing recorded year by year in the valuation roll, and thereby relieve the individual citizens of a great deal of
unnecessary labour, expense and anxiety, and, on the other hand, relieve the Government of a great deal of unnecessary expenditure.

The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Craigie Aitchison): This Amendment raises a very important point indeed. We are dealing here with the ascertainment of cultivation value for the purposes of this Bill. The Bill says that when you are dealing with the ascertainment of cultivation value, you are not to take the dwelling-house on the farm into account. That is the effect of the words which this Amendment proposes to leave out. The position is this. We are defining agricultural buildings and we say that agricultural buildings are those buildings included in any agricultural lands and heritages, but excluding the dwelling-house. The effect of that is that if there is a building which you can reasonably say is an agricultural building it is brought into account in ascertaining the cultivation value. That means such a building as a barn or a stable, but, on the other hand, you do not take the dwelling-house into account. In that respect the position in Scotland, as we propose under the Bill, is precisely the same as the position in England.
I agree that there is a difference, and a material difference, between our system of tenure and the English system of tenure, and I hope hon. Members will not forget that when we come to deal with later Amendments on the Paper, but for the purpose of ascertaining the cultivation value the view of the Government is that you should apply exactly the same rule in Scotland as is applied in England, and that is to exclude the dwelling-house from the computation. May I answer a specific point put to me by the right hon. Member. He pointed out that in Clause 27 buildings were included, but the right hon. Gentlemen must have failed to notice that in Clause 27 we are defining agricultural land. The definition with which we are dealing in this Amendment is that of agricultural buildings, quite a different thing. For these reasons, I have to intimate that the Government cannot accept the Amendment.

Major ELLIOT: We have been waiting for some time to discover whether the Lord Advocate has followed any of the discussions which have been going
on in connection with this Bill, and we are astonished to find that he has not even read the Debate on the English Bill. Would the Committee gather from what he has said that only last night the Solicitor-General offered to make this concession which he is now refusing in the case of Scotland?

The LORD ADVOCATE: The hon. and gallant Member is quite inaccurate. The Solicitor-General said that the matter would be considered. That is a different thing from offering to make a concession.

Major ELLIOT: I am perfectly willing to leave it at that. I have a better belief in the bona fides of the Solicitor-General for England than the Lord Advocate, who now refuses to make any observation similar to that made by the Solicitor-General. Why does he deny for Scotland what the Solicitor-General is willing to offer for England? We have a right to ask this question, and to demand an answer.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I said that the view of the Government was that there should not be one rule for Scotland and another rule for England, and it necessarily follows from that, if the hon. and gallant Member will take the trouble to think, that if the Government decide to alter the rule as regards England there will inevitably be an alteration also as regards Scotland.

Major ELLIOT: This indeed is reducing the discussions on this Bill so far as Scotland is concerned to a farce. I call the attention of hon. Members opposite—the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood), the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern), the hon. Member for North Lanark (Miss Lee)—to the position.

Mr. McGOVERN: You must not bring us into your quarrel.

Major ELLIOT: I know that the hon. Member for Shettleston will not stand up for Scotland. The proposal before the Committee is that the Scottish system should not be torn up, should not be destroyed, by the Lord Advocate in his desire to run at the tail of the English cart. He will run at the tail of the English cart whether he makes this con-
cession or not. He does not propose to argue with his Scottish colleagues, or give any justification. All he says is that what my English allies say must be observed. If they say cottages shall come in, they shall come in, but if they say cottages shall go out, they shall go out! [Interruption.] That might meet with the applause of English Members but I shall be surprised if it meets with the applause of Scottish Members. Do hon. Members below the Gangway consider this is a reasonable way of carrying on the discussion of Scottish affairs? The Solicitor-General said that he would consider whether the Government could do anything in Clause 8 to extend it to include cottages. Surely that was an offer made in a well-recognised Parliamentary form, with the understanding that something would be done, and it was reasonable to suppose that a reasonable case had been put forward and that he was willing to consider it. If that was not the meaning there was no point in the offer of the Solicitor-General. It was on that understanding that the hon. and gallant Member for Oxford (Captain Bourne) withdrew the Amendment.
Surely the Lord Advocate might have gone as far as the English Solicitor-General allowed himself to go last night. If they can bring in this proposal for England, where it is alien to the system, surely they can bring it in for Scotland where it is natural to the system. If it can be administered in England it can be administered in Scotland. We can leave it to other Scottish Members to press home the importance of this matter on the Lord Advocate. He has made a poor beginning on such a controversial Clause as this in taking the view that the affairs of the Scottish nation are to be discussed merely as ancillary to the discussion between) the hon. and gallant Member for Oxford and the English Solicitor-General. It is a bad look-out for Scotland. [Interruption.] I know hon. Members opposite are much better at interruption than in looking after the interests of Scotland, but Scotland knows it and will know more about it when it reads the Debate of this afternoon.

Mr. MACPHERSON: The Committee is indebted to the Lord Advocate for the clearness of his exposition of the point the Committee is now discussing. It is quite obvious that the purpose of this
Clause is to ascertain what is called cultivation value, and he has taken the point that the whole trend of the Bill is to find the cultivation value by getting rid of the dwelling house as far as land is concerned. It is an old established usage in Scottish law and custom, when you are dealing with agriculture, to include the dwelling house and cottages in the land and I, therefore, looked for an explanation from the Lord Advocate, and I think I got it. It may be right or it may be wrong, but his explanation seemed to me to be perfectly clear and I was astonished at the indignation shown by the right hon. and gallant Member for Pollok (Sir J. Gilmour) and the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove (Major Elliot). I showed the same indignation, but with far more reason, during the five years they occupied positions in the Government. What happened in the case of the De-rating Act?

Mr. MACQUISTEN: It relieved them of taxation.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I agree, and the hon. and learned Member for Argyllshire (Mr. Macquisten) supports me. The hon. Member for Kelvingrove with needless acidity attacked the Lord Advocate because, as he said, he was running at the tail of the English cart. That is exactly what happened, so far as Scotland was concerned, during the five years of the last Administration. Take the De-rating Act. During the discussions on that Measure we said, with less acidity I hope than the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove has shown to-day, that the main propositions were settled in accordance with the law of England, and Scottish Members had to follow the tail of the English cart during the whole of those Debates. If that Act is bad—and there are signs that it is working badly—it is due to the fact that it followed the English Bill. There is a good deal in the point made by the right hon. and gallant Member for Pollok. I think it would have been wise if we had had what is called the Liberal Amendment before us. In a discussion of this kind, when we want to be fair between all individuals in the State, we should know exactly what the Government intend to do with regard to the proposal put forward in the proposed new Clause, but so far we have had no indication of the Government's intentions. The Lord Advocate was quite accurate in his statement as to the sug-
gestion of the Solicitor-General. He did not go as far as the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove has suggested, but the Lord Advocate might well consider, as this is a very important Amendment, whether he is not prepared to take the same line in regard to it as the Solicitor-General took on Clause 27. That would be a wise proceeding and I hope the Lord Advocate will take it.

The LORD ADVOCATE: May I make it perfectly plain in case there is any ambiguity in the matter, that so far as Scotland is concerned we are prepared in this matter to take the same line as was taken by the Solicitor-General yesterday, and if the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove had not indulged in a display of sham indignation he would have been well able to appreciate the point, and it would not be necessary for me to state it again.

Mr. BOOTHBY: In the first speech which the Lord Advocate made, he said that the Government were unable to accept this Amendment, and he left it at that. In his second speech he said that the Government would do in regard to Scotland whatever the Solicitor-General for England did in regard to England. Now, in a third speech, he says he will consider the matter himself. Which of these three courses does he propose to take?

Mr. MacLAREN: With regard to the statement of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Ross and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson), and also the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne), that we shall be in some dubiety as to this Clause and its effects, unless we have the Liberal Amendment before us, I would point out that the Liberal Amendment does not affect this Clause at all. If the Liberal Amendment has any meaning, or if it has any effect at all, it will have an effect upon land outside the agricultural area altogether. Therefore, this new-found difficulty has no substance in it. I was very much distressed to see my genial colleague, the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove (Major Elliot), working himself up into such a hot passion. I was born in Glasgow and I am proud of some of the representatives who come from Glasgow. [HON. MEMBERS: "Only some!"] Yes, of some of them. There is much truth in the statement that
in the House of Commons Scotland is treated as a sort of appanage of the British Empire, something which has got in by mistake, and which we would rather be without, and I quite agree that it is time that the question of the opportunities for the discussion of Scottish affairs should be more seriously faced. But looking back at the past, I do not know that the conduct of Scottish affairs under the previous Administration warrants the passion of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Kelvingrove, or the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Pollok Division (Sir J. Gilmour). I well remember that when the Conservative Government were in office I wondered many a night if Scotland had any identity or individuality at all.
Coming back to the discussion of the Amendment I agree that there was point in the promised concession of last night, but surely there is point also in the Lord Advocate's contention of to-day, namely, that there must be uniformity of practice in valuation whatever happens. If there is going to be a valuation, it is merely a technical point that there should be uniformity in the valuation as between England and Scotland. I think it would be a mistake if the Committee began the discussion of the Scottish Clause of this Bill with the idea that the practice of rating is to govern the practice in the valuation of the land. That cannot possibly be so. The valuation under this Bill is for a specific purpose, and the valuation of land for the purpose of the Bill must be entirely divorced from anything in the nature of the law of rating as it now stands. I feel that the Lord Advocate, with his characteristic reticence and his Socttish disposition to be quiet, should not be left alone to meet the frontal attack made upon him by the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove.

Mr. SKELTON: Apparently the position taken up on this Amendment is that whatever England does, Scotland ought to do it also. If the learned Solicitor-General for England says "Yes," then the learned Lord Advocate says "Yes"; and if the learned Solicitor-General for England says "No," then, curiously enough, the learned Lord Advocate says "ditto." My hon. Friend the Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) treated this Amendment as if it dealt with a mere
detail of technique. I cannot accept that view. If that were the only issue involved, it would not be worth while continuing the Debate, but in my opinion the Amendment is of considerable importance, and I should like to place my view of it clearly before the Committee. We are told that if England says that cottages are to be exempted, Scotland will say so too. The matter is apparently under consideration but I submit that that is not the test.
The first test is that the Scottish agricultural system with regard to buildings on farms is quite different from that which exists over the greater part of England. I think that one can speak almost without qualification in saying that on all farms of any size in Scotland there are cottages in which the farm workers live, but, in England, until you get some way north of the Trent, that system is almost unknown. In the South and Midlands of England cottages on farms have no part in the cultivation value of land. Speaking generally, all through the South and Midlands of England the farm workers live, not in farm cottages on the farms, but in villages outside the farms. If the question of the exclusion or inclusion of dwelling houses is to be decided by England, and if the cultivation value of a particular farm is to be considered, in view of the number of dwelling houses on it, then that is a condition which does not exist over the greater part of England. It is therefore no mere detail of technique.
We shall be shutting our eyes to the whole system under which Scottish agriculture is worked if we pretend that dwelling houses in Scotland have nothing to do with the cultivation of the farm. Supposing that the Solicitor-General says "No" and that the Lord Advocate says "ditto," the result will be most unfortunate. In the first place it will increase the tendency—I do not say very largely but quite obviously—to have "led" farms, instead of farms cultivated by the man in the farm-house. If you include the farm-house among the elements of the cultivation value, you raise the cultivation value, and you give a distinct impetus to the system of the farmhouse being occupied by the farmer. The case is still more clear in regard to the cottages. We know the difficulties which
exist in regard to providing sufficient farm cottages in Scotland, and keeping them in proper repair. The last Parliament tried to deal with that subject. You want to have in this Bill some sort of device in favour of an adequate number of farm cottages, and not to put the bias on the other way.
If you include farm cottages as an element in the cultivation value of the farm you stimulate the increase of farm cottages. If you exclude them, you get the opposite result. It may be said that this is a matter of comparative detail, but, at a time when agriculture is depressed, when all questions of the return from the capital which is put into the land are of great interest, when the land is being stripped of capital, you ought to include any element which will tend to increase rather than decrease the number of dwelling houses on farms. This is a situation to which we cannot shut our eyes, and that is why, apart from any question of national prestige or the position of Scotland in the House of Commons, I do not regard this as a suitable occasion on which to approximate the Scottish system to the English system. I ask hon. Gentlemen opposite, therefore, to believe me when I say that I am not spinning out this matter for any purpose except to make it quite clear to the Committee. If you start with the assumption that the method of the cultivation of land in Scotland differs, for the most part, from the English method, why should you not have a different method of estimating the cultivation value as between the two countries?
There is one other consideration. As I understand the Bill, the only agricultural land upon which the tax will fall is land near the towns, and, speaking broadly, the greater number of agricultural subjects in Scotland which are going to be valued will never have any tax imposed upon them. I believe that the total number of agricultural subjects in Scotland is about 76,000. Let us assume that not more than 20,000 of these are sufficiently near towns to run the risk of having to pay the tax. I think that is an overstatement. It is far more likely to be 2,000. The valuation farms which are far away from towns is not going to be followed by taxation. Surely, therefore, in the interests of ordinary administrative common sense
you want a simple system of valuation, and a simple system of ascertaining the cultivation value is to take, as a basis, the figure in the valuation roll—that is to say, in Scotland, a figure which includes the dwelling houses, the farm and farmhouse there being treated as unum quid. On the Lord Advocate's own view, unless our Amendment is adopted the position will be that whereas in England you have a valuation roll to help you, which you can make your foundation and your jumping-off place, in Scotland the valuation roll is no use to you because it includes the farm as unum quid with the dwelling house, and we have to start off there to ascertain an absolutely fresh value, namely, the value without the house. When we consider that the bulk of these valuations are not going to eventuate in taxation, I say that that would be an administrative absurdity, in which no common-sense Minister ought to indulge.
If practical grounds weigh with hon. Members opposite then I submit that on practical grounds there is a strong reason why the Scottish system should be maintained in this matter, so that we shall not have an entirely new process of valuation introduced for subjects which will never be taxed. Comments have been made as to some observations of the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove (Major Elliot). It is all very well to say that he roused himself to a purely stage passion but hon. Members, who are such glorious Home Rulers in Scotland—but who when they come to this House of Commons are so perfectly useless to Scotland—ought to consider that it cannot be good for their country, or for those responsible for maintaining its position in a united Parliament, to have the long-continued system, and the principles upon which its agriculture has been conducted, torn up by a definition Clause in a taxing statute.

Mr. MacLAREN: There has been no system of valuation for land value taxation purposes in Scotland at all and therefore it cannot be torn up.

Mr. SKELTON: Although the hon. Gentleman comes from Glasgow and I only come from Edinburgh I quite understand that, but if he had listened to me, he would realise that what I said was that in a definition Clause of a taxing
Act it is an unnecessary degradation and a stupidity, taking Scotland vis-à-vis England, to make an assumption as to the method of calculation which has never been made before. Surely it is a commonplace of Statutes dealing with taxation that when you apply taxation to Scotland and England, you try to make it fit the systems of the two countries. You do not alter the systems of the two countries every time you bring in some new and absurd tax.

Mr. G. HARDIE: Is there any difference between the Income Tax in Scotland and in England?

Mr. SKELTON: No, but that is not the point. The hon. Member seems to be a typical heckler, who, having got his question off his chest, does not in the least care for the answer. Everyone knows that all taxation has to be interpreted according to the laws of a country. Here is a provision which will change for the worse the system under which Scottish agriculture is conducted. It seems to me to be just the kind of thing which Scottish Members in a united Parliament ought to be vigilant to avoid. There is no use in constantly beating the Scottish drum out of doors and not keeping our eyes open to this kind of thing indoors. This provision is giving a bias in the matter of Scottish agriculture against the genius of Scottish agriculture and the system under which it is conducted. It is not a matter of mere technique in which it is sufficient, if the Solicitor-General says "Bow wow," that the Lord Advocate should also say "Bow wow."

Mr. G. HARDIE: I am rather surprised at the remarks of the hon. Member who has just spoken. On the basis of the charge that he made regarding the home rulers on this side of the Committee, let him cast his mind back to the time when we were dealing with the derating Act, wherein certain Scottish institutions were torn to pieces or melted and recast. I am surprised at the shortness of the memory of the hon. Member. What we have to face is the fact that it was not those associated with the Socialist party who sold Scotland.

Mr. SKELTON: Let me recall to the hon. Member's memory that in the derating Act, on this very matter of how
we should de-rate agricultural subjects, the system adopted was one which suited the Scottish method of cultivation. For that purpose, we did treat the farm as a unum quid and de-rated is according to its value as a unum quid.

Mr. HARDIE: But the question the hon. Member has raised deals with derating, and I am dealing with valuation.

Mr. SKELTON: The hon. Member referred to the de-rating Act and said that Members on this side were more or less careless regarding the interests of Scotland. Yet we dealt with Scottish agriculture as it existed.

Mr. HARDIE: Now we are dealing with valuation. I referred to the breaking up of the education ad hoc body and the parish council. That statement shows what interest hon. Members opposite have in the claims of Scotland. To-day they see the teachers being asked to accept a reduction of 10 per cent.——

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: This Debate seems to have developed into a competition as to who and who is not a friend of Scotland, and the subject raised by the Amendments is almost obscured by these rival claims.

Mr. HARDIE: I was giving results and not merely making general statements. Let me come back to the subject before the Committee, as to whether this proposal is something that ought not to be applied until it is understood what is to be the application of the same Clause of the Bill to England. That seems to be the point of the Amendment. You cannot make any difference if you are going to value. Valuation is bound to depend on what a thing is worth. That has to be the basis. Let hon. Members opposite remember another thing about the de-rating Act, Let them remember that they put forward a formula which has never worked.

Duchess of ATHOLL: Are we discussing the de-rating Act?

Mr. HARDIE: No, but we are discussing the comments of hon. Members opposite on this Amendment and the reply to it. I hope that our time is not going to be wasted on little things like this. I should not have intervened but for the
way in which hon. Members opposite have tried to take the discussion away from the Amendment.

Sir PATRICK FORD: There seems to have been a little heat engendered in regard to Scotland. I would like to have the Lord Advocate's attention for a minute or two. It has been said, first of all, that he said he would not consider the question. Then it was said that he said he would do whatever the Solicitor-General did. Then it was said that he said he would take his own line. I hope that the Lord Advocate, will go into consultation with the Solicitor-General and think out the special needs of Scotland on the same, but not quite the same, lines. We do not always want to have separate Bills for two countries. The whole value of this united Parliament and the system of legislation along parallel lines as far as possible, lies in the fact that each country may perhaps learn a little from the practical experience of the other, and that we can get something approaching uniformity for the King's subjects. That is not to be done by shutting our eyes to the facts. I hope that the Lord Advocate will keep up the Scottish end of the question, that he will see that Scottish needs are attended to, and not shut his eyes to them. I ask for an assurance that he will do that, and whether there is a Division on this Amendment or not, I trust that by the Report stage some progress will have been made in the matter.

Lord ERSKINE: I wish to put one question. We have been told that under the English system the farmhouse is to be included in the cultivation value, whereas cottages are not to be so included. The Solicitor-General gave a promise that he would consider whether he would not also include the cottages in the cultivation value. As the Debate has proceeded, it seems to me that the Government are not going to get the uniformity which the Lord Advocate apparently desires, but that in Scotland you will not include the farmhouse in the cultivation value, whereas in England you will include the farmhouse in the cultivation value. If the Lord Advocate says that that is so, it vitiates the whole of his argument.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I am sorry that there should have been so much confusion in the matter. I made it plain at least three times that we are prepared to consider this matter in exactly the same way as the question is being considered from the English standpoint. That does not mean that we rule out of consideration any matter which is peculiar and appropriate to Scotland. I can only express the wish that in the earlier speeches on the Amendment hon. Members opposite had shown the courtesy and moderation which later speeches have shown. If it has been difficult to make the matter plain, it has been due to the violence and discourtesy with which the Debate was opened from the Opposition side of the Committee. I have now made the matter plain and I have nothing to add.

Duchess of ATHOLL: I do not want to prolong any acerbity or heat, but I would remind the Lord Advocate that he opened the Debate and said explicitly that the Government would not accept the Amendment.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I did not open the Debate. It was opened from the other side of the Committee.

5.0 p.m.

Duchess of ATHOLL: Then L apologise. It was because the Lord Advocate made such an impression on my mind, that I thought he opened the Debate. He gave us no hope that he would give the matter any consideration at all until my hon. and gallant Friend elicited from him a statement that he was prepared to consider it. I submit that that is not enough to satisfy us, for our claim is that the case in Scotland in this matter is very much stronger than that of England. As has been pointed out by my hon. Friend the Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton), whereas in England the farm worker often lives in the village some distance from the farm, in Scotland the general practice is for the farm worker to live on the farm, and no farmer applying for the lease of a farm would regard it as properly equipped unless on the farm there were the necessary cottages for the workers. Farm cottages on a farm in Scotland have practically no value except for the man who will work for the farmer on that farm, whereas under a system such as that in England, in which the
farm worker lives in a village, the cottage which he inhabits may have 5.0 p.m. a value for someone else. On this side we are not satisfied to hear the Lord Advocate say that he will follow what is decided for England and consider the case of Scotland along with that of England. We ask him to point out to the English Solicitor-General that the conditions in Scotland in this matter are radically different from those in England.

Mr. KELLY: I am sorry to intervene in a Scottish discussion, but those who have spoken from the opposite benches seem to have forgotten the conditions operating in the average farming districts. They seem to have forgotten all about the tied cottages, and they seem to imagine that the farm worker lives in some cottage for a few weeks and removes from it, and that then somebody else comes to it. I wish that were the case and that we had not got the tied cottage system.

Major ELLIOT: We were basing ourselves on the statement of the Solicitor-General, which he made when rebutting a similar Amendment last night, as follows:
It is very difficult for the valuer to value as a single unit land which is not even contiguous but separated in several different cases.
What he was referring to there, he had indicated just before when he said:
You would have claims for the inclusion of sites of cottages a mile or two miles off."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 17th June, 1931; col. 1871, Vol. 253.]

Lord ERSKINE: Will the Lord Advocate answer my question? We were told yesterday that the farmhouse is included in the cultivation value, but it appears in the Bill as it now stands that the farmhouse will not be included in the cultivation value. Is that so?

Sir J. GILMOUR: This is a point of very considerable importance, and I think we have some cause of complaint that the Law Officer cannot answer specifically what is the actual fact. The position in Scotland is that the farm is always treated as a unit, and that for all purposes of valuation at the present time, and for certain payments which the tenant farmer may make in respect of taxation, he can claim the value of the cottages on the farm, which are in a
separate column in the valuation roll. This is not a matter which alone affects the proprietor; it is one which affects the tenant farmer also. I ask the Scottish Office to observe, first of all, that, as I understand it, in the English Bill the cultivation value is to include the farmhouse and to exclude the cottages. The claim made upon the Solicitor-General by my hon. Friends from England is that in future they should include not only the farmhouse but the cottages. Now in our ease, under the Bill both the farmhouse and the cottages are excluded.
We are trying to get this Bill on to a fair basis in whatever way this tax is going to hit the individual taxpayer, but, if the Bill remains as it is now, I submit that there is a discrepancy and in fact that the farmhouse is included in England and excluded in Scotland, that cottages may be included in England and are denitely excluded in Scotland, and further, that at the present time any tenant farmer in Scotland dealing with the question of recoupment of taxation which exists to-day for other purposes, can take the cottages which appear in the valuation roll in a separate column and get relief from Income Tax from that very fact. What is going to be the effect upon that individual who has that right of claim to-day if, under this Bill, without any thought on these problems and apparently in complete ignorance of them on the part of those who speak for the Scottish Office, we see that taken away from countless individuals? I am bound to say that I really think the question merits more attention on the part of the Law Officer for Scotland than it has received up to the present.

The LORD ADVOCATE: The statement which I originally made was perfectly right. In England we do not include the farmhouse for the purposes of cultivation value, and accordingly the question of the right hon. Gentleman was addressed to me under a complete misapprehension. What I said was that in working out cultivation value we did not propose to apply in Scotland anything different from the rule applied in England. I have said more than once that if the question with regard to England is to be considered, we are prepared to consider also the question with regard to Scotland, and I have no doubt that we shall take into account all the circumstances or conditions that are
peculiar lo Scotland when arriving at a decision upon that matter. I have explained that more than once, and I can add nothing more.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: As the Bill stands at present, it gives the English farmers an advantage over-those of Scotland, and, that being so, I think we are quite justified in asking that that matter should be looked into by the Government. We who come from the agricultural districts know what the condition of affairs is there, and, if our farmers are going to be landed in taxation in this way, I would advise those hon. Members who represent the towns not to sake their holidays in those agricultural areas.

Mr. BOOTHBY: I would draw the attention of the Lord Advocate to Clause 27, which says what "agricultural land" means, and goes on:
but also includes any farmhouse, that is to say, a house occupied in connection with such land as aforesaid and used as the dwelling-house of the person who is primarily engaged in carrying on or directing agricultural operations on that land.
Does that not make a wonderful difference?

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 241; Noes, 134.

Division No. 328.]
AYES.
[5.9 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fits, West)
Egan, W. H.
Lawrence, Susan


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Elmley, Viscount
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Foot, Isaac
Lawson, John James


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)
Leach, W.


Alpass, J. H.
Gill, T. H.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)


Ammon, Charles George
Gillett, George M.
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Angell, Sir Norman
Glassey, A. E.
Lees, J.


Arnott, John
Gossling, A. G.
Leonard, W.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Gould, F.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Ayles, Walter
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Logan, David Gilbert


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Gray, Milner
Longbottom, A. W.


Barnes, Alfred John
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Coins)
Longden, F.


Barr, James
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro'W.)
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.


Batey, Joseph
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lunn, William


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Groves, Thomas E.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Grundy, Thomas W.
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)


Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Hall, J. H (Whitechapel)
McElwee, A.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
McEntee, V. L.


Benson, G.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Hardie, David (Rutherglen)
MacLaren, Andrew


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Hardie, G. D. (Springburn)
MacNeill-Weir, L.


Bowen, J. W.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.


Broad, Francis Alfred
Haycock, A. W.
McShane, John James


Brockway, A. Fenner
Hayes, John Henry
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)


Bromfield, William
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Mander, Geoffrey le M.


Brooke, W.
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Manning, E. L.


Brothers, M.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Mansfield, W.


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
March, S.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Herriotts, J.
Marcus, M.


Buchanan, G.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Markham, S. F.


Burgess, F. G.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Marley, J.


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks, W. R. Elland)
Hoffman, P. C.
Marshall, Fred


Cameron, A. G.
Hollins, A.
Mathers, George


Cape, Thomas
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Matters, L. W.


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Maxton, James


Chater, Daniel
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Messer, Fred


Clarke, J. S.
Isaacs, George
Middleton, G.


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Mills, J. E.


Cove, William G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Montague, Frederick


Cowan, D. M.
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Morley, Ralph


Cripps, Sir Stafford
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Morris, Rhys Hopkins


Daggar, George
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)


Dallas, George
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. (Preston)
Mort, D. L.


Dalton, Hugh
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Muff, G.


Davies, D. L. (Pontypridd)
Kelly, W. T.
Muggeridge, H. T.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Murnin, Hugh


Day, Harry
Kinley, J.
Nathan, Major H. L.


Denman, Hon. R. D.
Kirkwood, D.
Noel Baker, P. J.


Devlin, Joseph
Knight, Holford
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)


Dukes, C.
Lang, Gordon
Oldfield, J. R.


Duncan, Charles
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Palin, John Henry


Ede, James Chuter
Lathan, G. (Sheffield, Park)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Edmunds, J. E.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Perry, S. F.


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Law, A. (Rossendale)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Phillips, Dr. Marion
Shield, George William
Viant, S. P.


Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Shillaker, J. F.
Walkden, A. G.


Pole, Major D. G.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Walker, J.


Potts, John S.
Simmons, C. J.
Wallace, H. W.


Price, M. P.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)
Watkins, F. C.


Quibell, D. J. K.
Sinkinson, George
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Sitch, Charles H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Rathbone, Eleanor
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Raynes, W. R.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
West, F. R.


Richardton, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Westwood, Joseph


Ritson, J.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Romerll, H. G.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Sorensen, R.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Rowson, Guy
Stamford, Thomas W.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Salter, Dr. Alfred
Stephen, Campbell
Wilson C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Strauss, S. R.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Sutton, J. E.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Sanders, W. S.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Sandham, E.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)
Wise, E. F


Sawyer, G. F.
Thurtle, Ernest
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Sexton, Sir James
Tinker, John Joseph
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Toole, Joseph



Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Tout, W. J.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Townend, A. E.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Sherwood, G. H.
Vaughan, David
Paling.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Ford, Sir P. J.
O'Connor, T. J.


Albery, Irving James
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir William (Armagh)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Perkins, W. R. D.


Atholl, Duchess of
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Boothby, R. J. G.
Gower, Sir Robert
Ramsbotham, H.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Boyce, Leslie
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Held, David D. (County Down)


Bracken, B.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Remer, John R.


Briscoe, Richard George
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James


Broadbent, Colonel J.
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hammersley, S. S.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Buchan, John
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Salmon, Major I.


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Hartington, Marquess of
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Savery, S. S.


Campbell, E. T.
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Skelton, A. N.


Chamberlain Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Chapman, Sir S.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Smithers, Waldron


Christie, J. A.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hurd, Percy A.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Colfox, Major William Philip
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Stanley, Hon. O. (Westmorland)


Colville, Major D. J.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Sueter Rear-Admiral M. F.


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Inskip, Sir Thomas
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Thompson, Luke


Cranborne, Viscount
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Thomson, Sir F.


Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Latham, H. P. (Scarboro' & Whitby)
Thomson, Mitchell-, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Train, J.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Dawson, Sir Philip
Lockwood, Captain J. H.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Macquisten, F. A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Wells, Sydney R.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Meller, R. J.
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Milne, Wardlaw-, J. S.
Womersley, W. J.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Everard, W- Lindsay
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.



Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Muirhead, A. J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Ferguson, Sir John
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Captain Sir George Bowyer and


Fermoy, Lord
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Sir George Penny.

Sir FREDERICK THOMSON: I beg to move, in page 30, line 3, to leave out from the word "security" to the word "incorporeal" in line 5, and to insert instead thereof the words:
'mortgagee' means 'creditor,' and 'mortgaged estate' means 'security subjects'.

This Amendment is an attempt to translate into phrases of Scottish law phrases unfamiliar to the law of Scotland.
The land values part of this Bill is a complicated Measure abounding in terms of English law, which are difficult of interpretation to the ordinary Scot and to people who may endeavour to transcribe the words which we find in the Bill into words which are familiar to the Scottish lawyer. The term "mortgage" is unknown to the law of Scotland, for instance. Lord Dunedin complained not long ago of the difficulty with which Scottish lawyers were often confronted in trying to construe Acts of Parliament in which English words were freely used; the Scottish courts were often set as impossible task. The necessity for this Amendment shows the absurdity of trying to deal with this matter in one Bill and of dealing with different legal systems at the same time. We are asked in one day to apply to Scotland this very complicated Measure which has many Clauses abounding in English legal phrases. It is certain to lead to confusion and much litigation, and this Amendment, by saying what the words mean in Scottish law, will make the matter perfectly clear.

The LORD ADVOCATE: This is entirely a matter of definition, and, if the definition suggested by my hon. and learned Friend were better than the definition in the Bill, I would not hesitate to accept it, but the definition which he proposes is inaccurate and makes the position worse. I think that he has failed to observe that in the definition Clause you have the words "mortgagee" and "mortgaged estate" and "mortgage debt" which he proposes to leave out, and the word "mortgage" is defined as "heritable security"——

Sir F. THOMSON: The paragraph goes on to say that "mortgagee" "mortgaged estate" and "mortgage debt" shall be construed accordingly. That is a very shorthand and incomplete way of describing them.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I cannot accept that view. I do not think that there is any difficulty in the meaning to be attached to those words, or that there is any ambiguity in them at all. It is really impossible to accept my hon. and learned Friend's Amendment, for it is quite inaccurate to describe "mortgagee" as "creditor." A mortgagee is a heritable creditor. It would therefore not do to accept the definition of the hon. and
learned Gentleman because every creditor is not a mortgagee.

Sir F. THOMSON: Is not that the definition given in the Conveyancing Acts?

The LORD ADVOCATE: I am not concerned with the definitions given in other Acts; we are dealing with this Act, and the correct definition of "mortgagee" is "heritable creditor." That is quite plain in the definitions in the Bill, and I suggest that the hon. Member should not press the Amendment.

Mr. SKELTON: There is a great deal in what my hon. and learned Friend says. It is a shorthand way of dealing with matters in the Bill. It defines only "mortgage" and then it says that the people concerned with mortgages shall be interpreted accordingly. That is a loose way of dealing with an important element in the Bill. In the matter of finding the right words for a complete definition Clause, we must ask the assistance of the Government, and I am not at all sure that we may not find, in some of the later efforts to make a complete Scottish legal dictionary, that there may be some improvements in some of the suggestions that we have made. There may be some criticism of the Amendment after what the Lord Advocate has just said, but I do not think that that excuses the Government from the necessity of seeing that the Scottish Clause is not disposed of before we have a complete guide of what the English words mean in Scotland.

Mr. R. W. SMITH: I understand the Lord Advocate to say that "mortgagee" means "heritable creditor." If that be so, the proper way to deal with this matter is to say that "mortgage" means "heritable security" and "mortgagee" means "heritable creditor," and then go on to describe "mortgage debt." It is ridiculous to put in just this one definition.

Sir DENNIS HERBERT: I venture to suggest that the Lord Advocate might meet my hon. Friends on this point. It is all very well to complain that their Amendment is not perfect. He has suggested a way of making it perfect; it is fairly obvious that the definition now in the Clause is imperfect, and I therefore ask him if he cannot deal with the matter by moving an Amendment to the Amendment
to insert the word "heritable" before "creditor." That would dispose of the only argument he has put up against the Amendment.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. SKELTON: I beg to move, in page 30, line 5, to leave out from the word "accordingly" to the word "incumbrance" in line 7, and to insert instead thereof the words:
'land' means the 'dominium utile of land'; 'estate' means 'interest'; 'estate of a term of years' means 'interest of a person in right of a lease'; 'incorporeal hereditaments' means 'estate in land other than the dominium utile.'
Our one desire is to have a complete guide for the Scottish Courts when they come to interpret the English words in this Bill. I do not want to pose as a learned lawyer in Scotland or anywhere else, but it is clear, if anyone has ever had any dealings with the procedure of Courts in Scotland, that time and again considerable trouble arise in approximating Scottish conditions to English language. That is an important reason for the Lord Advocate considering closely the words that are dealt with here. The Committee will see that the Amendment defines "land." I am not going to trouble the Committee with the definition; it may be too narrow or too broad, but I cannot help thinking that "land," which, so far as I know, is not a term of art in Scotland at all, should have some definition, especially in such a Bill as this. I am not going to plead that "dominium utile of land" is accurate and the right phrase, but it would take up too much time to tell the Committee what it means. "Estate" is a word that is perfectly well known with regard to real property in England, but it is not a word that is known to the law of Scotland at all. In Scotland, if you ask a Court to interpret "estate" in regard to heritable property, you ask them to do something which they have no judicial means of doing. Therefore, we have put in the Amendment what I have always understood to be the Scottish equivalent, that is, interest in land instead of estate in land. The Lord Advocate will consider whether that is right or wrong.
Then again, "estate of a term of years" has a highly technical meaning in England and is utterly unknown in Scotland. I should have said to begin with
that in this Amendment we are dealing to some extent with words which are not defined at all in the Bill. On the last Amendment it could be said against us that it was only making an existing definition more elaborate, but here is a technical English phrase, "an estate of a term of years," which has got no meaning at all to Scottish lawyers. Surely it is not too much to ask the Law Officers, before this Bill has passed, and has to be interpreted by the Courts, to tell the Scottish Courts what, for the purposes of this Bill, these English phrases mean. I urge that point on the Lord Advocate, more particularly with reference to the phrase "estate of a term of years." In the same way I would draw his attention, without further elaborating the point, to the phrase "incorporeal hereditament"—if I am even pronouncing it right—which is a phrase quite unknown to the law of Scotland. I do not know what a Scottish Judge would say if he were called upon to decide whether something was or was not an incorporeal hereditament. Counsel would have the time of their lives, and there is no reason why the discussion should ever end. If the Bill were sedulously searched I am afraid the dictionary would have to be extended. There are phrases which demand that we should supply a proper lexicon before the Bill passes.

Sir F. THOMSON: I have one question to ask the Attorney-General. The Clause says:
'incorporeal hereditament' means 'incorporeal heritable right'.
Will the Lord Advocate please give us an example of an incorporeal heritable right which is known to the law of Scotland? We have endeavoured, in the concluding part of our Amendment, to give a definition of "incorporeal hereditament" which I think might be satisfactory, but what does it mean? Does it mean servitudes or teinds? These are all obscure matters. Our one desire is to make things easy for the courts in Scotland. The only people in Scotland who are likely to get any profit out of the Bill are the members of the legal profession.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I rather gather that the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Shelton) does not really mean to press this Amendment to a Division, but has put it down in order to draw attention
to the importance of definitions of the rather technical terms which have to be used in this Bill. May I say that I appreciate his intention and am very willing to inquire, between now and the Report stage, whether the expressions we use are adequate or not, and I will be very glad to confer with him and consider any representation he may choose to make. But may I point out that the definitions in the Amendment are utterly impossible? I do not want to enter into any controversy as we are going to consider the matter, but I would point out that it says:
' Land' means 'the dominium utile of land'.
That looks innocuous, but if the Government had walked into that trap it would have had a most far-reaching repercussion upon the provisions of this Bill. I do not suggest that the Amendment was put down with any such purpose, but dominium utile is only one estate in land, and if we interpreted land as meaning the dominium utile the result would be that we should only value one estate in land, which would materially diminish the value. That shows the importance of scrutinising these points. I can deal with each of the points in the Amendment, but, as I am willing to consider them before the Report stage, perhaps the Committee would prefer that I should not go into them now.

Mr. SKELTON: I do hope the Lord Advocate will pay special attention to the phrase "estate of a term of years."

The LORD ADVOCATE: I do not think my hon. and learned Friend will find anywhere in the Bill that land means an "estate of a term of years." That is a misquotation. The late Attorney-General will be able to enlighten us upon it. It is rather a clumsy English term. There is very little doubt as to its meaning, but if it is thought it ought to be cleared up by definition we are prepared to consider the matter.

Sir ROBERT HORNE: I do not think the Lord Advocate has taken this matter sufficiently seriously. This is not a technical point. It is a question of the language of the law of our country. Laws must be precise; when we deal with the rights of the people we must be perfectly definite. There are a number
of terms in this Bill which have no meaning in Scotland and are not used in Scotland. Though I have a passing acquaintance with what is happening in England, there are many phrases here which I do not know how to interpret. When we are dealing with land rights in Scotland we ought to use Scottish terms which can be interpreted in Scottish law. I would remind the Lord Advocate of something said years ago by Lord Dunedin in the House of Lords when a term which is familiar enough in England, and not unfamiliar to us as borrowed from England—the term "a mortgage"—was used in a Scottish deed. Lord Dunedin laid great stress upon the fact that mortgage was a term which was meaningless in Scottish law, and said we must use Scottish expressions when dealing with Scottish rights. I do not know what Lord Dunedin would say if he read this page of the Bill.

The LORD ADVOCATE: If the right hon. Gentleman will take the trouble to read the Bill he will find that we define "mortgage."

Sir R. HORNE: Yes, but I am only using that as an example. There are many other phrases here which are not interpreted at all. The Lord Advocate must admit that. If he is unwilling to admit it we can debate this for a very long time, and he will have very much greater difficulty in getting through the Clauses of the Bill. I would venture to utter a protest as to the way the Bill has been drawn up in regard to the rights of Scotland. If this kind of thing is to be accepted it is the first good argument I know for establishing a home rule Parliament in Scotland; but if that were to be done and we wished to defend the rights of Scotland and make things intelligible to the Scottish people there would have to be an entirely different set of people representing Scotland in that home rule Parliament from what we have here. In defining Scottish rights, obligations and burdens we must have terms of Scottish law, and I beg the Lord Advocate to take this criticism seriously, and not in the capricious fashion in which he has treated it, and give Scotland some appearance of receiving recognition in a matter of this importance.

Mr. MacLAREN: I cannot understand what is happening here. I look at the Bill and I find it says:
'Incorporeal hereditament' means 'incorporeal heritable right'.
Then I look at the Amendment and I find it proposes that we should leave out those words. Some very naive or cunning Scottish lawyer has been at work. He suggests that after having deleted those words we should insert the statement that land means the "dominium utile of land." Why did they bring in this definition of land here? Why did they not attempt to bring in some Scottish legal definition for incorporeal hereditaments? Because the words they propose to insert, namely, "land means the dominium utile of land" have nothing to do with the words they are trying to interpret in Scottish legal phraseology. This "incorporeal hereditament" has nothing to do with the words which it is proposed to insert in their place. One has to be careful when these innocent Amendments are projected into a Bill. Instead of dominium utile, what about dominium directum? Utile here really means the tenant. [Interruption.] Oh yes it does, in Roman law. [HON. MEMBERS: "This is Scottish law!"] I agree, but Scotland has stuck very strictly to Roman law, and if this innocent little passage had been injected into the Bill it would have meant that the tenant would have been left chargeable with the tax and the directing owner would have got away scot free. This little Amendment was put forward by a gentleman with great foresight, a sunning and cubtle—[Laughter]—I mean cunning and subtle.

Mr. SKELTON: As the Mover of the Amendment, may I ask whether I am Mr. Sunning or Mr. Cubtle?

Mr. MacLAREN: With my Scottish doric, bad Latin and indifferent English I have tripped up. I suggest that the person behind this Amendment knew perfectly well what he was doing. There is a meaning for what in Scottish law is called an "incorporeal hereditament." Scotsmen can have no difficulty in taking the finest words the English lawyers have ever attempted to use in the Law Courts and twisting them to their own ends. Here the attempt is to leave out "incorporeal hereditament," and I aver
that someone has put in this innocent Amendment to throw upon the tenant the full weight of the land tax.

Sir THOMAS INSKIP: The hon. Member has not read the Amendment. The last line of the Amendment deals with the point he is making.

Mr. MacLAREN: The Amendment we are discussing now is to delete the words "incorporeal hereditament" means "incorporeal hereditable right"——

Sir T. INSKIP: ——and proposes to put in other words.

Mr. MacLAREN: Yes, but what is it that it is proposed to put it?

Sir T. INSKIP: The last line defines "incorporeal hereditament."

Mr. MacLAREN: To what line are you referring? I am dealing with the words on the Order Paper. You have in the Amendment a definition that land means the "dominium utile of land" and the words that follow are mere trimmings.

Mr. SKELTON: They are all serious definitions. The English phrase is put first and then what we regard as the equivalent Scottish phrases. Land is defined as the "dominium utile of land" and the term "incorporeal hereditaments" is defined as "estate in land other than the dominium utile."

Mr. MacLAREN: Perhaps I am attributing to the drafter of this Amendment more subtlety than I have a right to credit him with, but I think it is one of the cleverest things I have seen in the form of an Amendment.

Sir P. FORD: If the hon. Member had read the last words of the Amendment, he would see that they take the sting out of his argument, because the Amendment states that "incorporeal hereditaments" mean
estate in land other than the dominium utile.

Mr. MacLAREN: Yes, the words are "other than the dominium utile," and I would like to know what that means. If the hon. and learned Member had used the phrase "dominium directum," I should have understood it. Not having done that, I suspected him of a very clever move which has not come off.

Sir T. INSKIP: If the Lord Advocate will turn to Clause 17 (1, a), he will see that it is provided that
where the estate is a term of years.'
There you have substantially the same expression as my hon. Friend has been seeking to define. If the Lord Advocate will look at Clause 17 (1, b) he will find the words:
where the estate is an estate in fee simple, a perpetual rent charge issuing out of the land and accruing during the year of charge.
To read that definition to a Scotsman would be like reading Hebrew to him unless you place upon it an interpretation.

Mr. W. S. MORRISON: It will, I think, be generally admitted that there has been a certain amount of confusion about these proposals, but the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) has certainly enriched our vocabulary by describing the drafter of this Amendment as being "sunning and cubtle." The object of this Amendment is simply to apply a complete set of definitions to this Bill. I think it is a little unfortunate that in matters of such importance a definition of the words which are going to be applied to the legal rights of our fellow countrymen in Scotland should be waved aside, and postponed to some obscure confabulation behind the scenes and not decided in Committee. One of the terms of which a definition is most required is that which has been referred to by the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) and the hon. and learned Member for Fareham (Sir T. Inskip) and which is
where the estate is a term of years.
That means nothing, and you are imposing upon the courts the added perplexity of having to deal with words that have no meaning at all. I submit that we ought to insist that there should be some attempt to define that term earlier than the Report stage, when it may be cluttered up with all the other efforts that will be necessary in order to produce some semblance of order in this chaotic Measure. I would like to ask what the Lord Advocate has in his mind as a suitable explanation of the expression "a term of years." I would also like to ask the right hon. Gentleman for a suitable definition of the phrase, "the estate is a term of years."

Mr. O'CONNOR: I suppose it may be considered to be out of order for an English Member to take part in a Debate upon Scottish terms of law. The definition has been given that, according to Scottish law, "incorporeal hereditaments" means incorporeal heritable rights. I would like to know if that is correct.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I suppose that incorporeal heritable rights and incorporeal hereditaments mean exactly the same thing.

Sir T. INSKIP: Does the Lord Advocate know what an incorporeal hereditament is?

Mr. SKELTON: The observation which the Lord Advocate has just made reminds me of a conversation which I had with a Scottish gillie in the far north of Scotland, when I asked him what was the meaning of the word "derg," and he replied that it meant just the same in English as it did in Gaelic.

Amendment negatived.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I beg to move, in page 30, line 8, after the word "tenure," to insert the words "'agreement' includes "feu charter.'"
We have to give the word "agreement" a meaning, because it would obviously be impossible to have the restrictions imposed in a feu charter treated in a different way from the restrictions that are imposed in a feu contract. This is really a drafting matter in order to prevent ambiguity.

Sir R. HORNE: I find that in another part of the Bill the word "agreement" is used, and it appears in paragraph (g) of the First Schedule. In Clause 23 (2) it is provided that:
where any agreement for any lease of land for a term of seven or more years has been produced to the commissioners.
If in that case you substitute "feu charter," it will make nonsense of the law of Scotland.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I will undertake to look into that point in regard to the definition of the word "agreement."

Major MCKENZIE WOOD: The material word is "includes."

6.0 p.m.

Major ELLIOT: Instead of simply dealing with this matter on the basis of looking into it between now and Report, would it not be possible 6.0 p.m. to deal with it now in the Bill, so that it can be altered, if desired, on Report? The difficulty is, as the Lord Advocate knows, that we are working under a very close schedule, and the Report stage will be telescoped into a very short period. In view of the possibility of moving the words out on Report, it would be possible now to put in a manuscript Amendment dealing with the point. That would not do any harm, and it would be desirable from our point of view, and particularly from the point of view of those in Scotland who will read this Debate, that they should have the words before them.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I am not sure, after what has been said, that the matter really requires any further consideration, because the Amendment says that the term "agreement" includes "feu charter." That does not limit the meaning of the word. What it does is to say that, when you are dealing with a feu charter, it is to be deemed an agreement, although in form it is not an agreement. Accordingly, as the hon. and gallant Member for Banff (Major Wood) has said, no point arises if you have regard to the word "includes" in this Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. SKELTON: I beg to move, in page 30, line 8, after the words last inserted, to insert the words:
'curtilage' means 'parts pertinents and privileges'; and the words and expressions used in this Section which are interpreted in the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act, 1924, shall, save as hereby qualified, have the meaning assigned thereto, respectively, by that Act.
The first part of this Amendment represents almost a last effort to get something like a proper lexicon. I think that the Lord Advocate, and even the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren, will agree that here there is no room for those horrible suspicions which the latter hon. Gentleman seems to entertain. The only word that we are seeking to define here is the word "curtilage." It is absolutely unknown in the law of Scotland. To my mind it suggests a sort of development of Mrs. Caudle's Curtain Lectures, and certainly
it is unknown in Scots law. I am told that the reason why it needs no definition is because, in certain Statutes common to the two countries, it has already slipped in without definition. Whether that is so or not I have not had an opportunity of verifying, but if, as I suspect, it is the case, it is surely only another reason for defining it when we have the chance to do so. If I may use our familiar Scottish phrase, this is an opportunity for "redding up" a little bit of a mess which has been made in previous Acts, and I commend this proposal to the Lord Advocate on that ground. I do not pretend to say positively that the precise equivalent is "parts, pertinents and privileges." I think it is, and those whom I have consulted think it is, but I am by no means pragmatical about it, and if the Lord Advocate tells us that this is not the right expression, I would ask him to let us have the right words; but do not let us fail to take this opportunity of clearing the matter up, both in this Statute and in others.
With regard to the second part of the Amendment—
the words and expressions used in this Section which are interpreted in the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act, 1924, shall, save as hereby qualified, have the meaning assigned thereto, respectively, by that Act "—
the point is obvious. Where we have a lexicon, let us make use of it, and this is a shorthand way of dealing with the general question—it is a way of dealing with such other English phrases as may have escaped our notice. My own view is that this is a matter which it is specially important to put right, because it is clear even to the Scots lawyer that "curtilage" has something to do with the open ground round dwelling-places and towns, and I believe that that is the fact. If so, it is going to be a matter of considerable importance in the Bill, with regard to both valuation and taxation, and it would be absurd if we were asked to tax curtilages in Scotland and no one could discover what a curtilage was.

The LORD ADVOCATE: We considered this matter of the definition of "curtilage," and we came to the conclusion that it was better to leave the word undefined. The difficulty about
definition is that the word has no very definite meaning, as I understand, in the law of England, and, accordingly, it is very dangerous to attempt to define an expression which in the law of England is itself indefinite. It is perfectly true that "curtilage" is not a term of art in Scotland, but, on the other hand, it has crept into statutes which apply to Scotland, and, that being the position, we thought it better to leave the word with, it may be, a very indefinite meaning. If you are dealing with an indefinite thing, it is far better to leave the definition of it. If a thing is definite it is capable of definition.

Sir P. FORD: Is the tax indefinite?

The LORD ADVOCATE: The hon. Gentleman will see when he comes to pay it. We also consider that the words "parts, pertinents and privileges," which are suggested in the Amendment, are not satisfactory, but, as we are willing, at the request of hon. Members opposite, to reconsider the whole question of definition, we will consider whether it is better to leave the word "curtilage" undefined, or whether we should attempt a definition. My own view is in favour of leaving it undefined, just because it is an indefinite thing.
The other part of the Amendment cannot be accepted. The proposal is that the words and expressions which are interpreted in the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act, 1924, shall, save as thereby qualified, have the meaning assigned to them respectively by that Act. We cannot accept that proposal, and for a very simple reason. In this Bill, certain terms are given meanings which are different from the meanings which are ordinarily used. [Interruption.] Hon. Members may laugh, but I am not discussing whether that is wise or not; I am stating the fact. For example, the term "owner" is given a meaning in the Bill which may be right or may be wrong, but, that being the position, the Committee will appreciate that you cannot just incorporate statutory definitions from the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act, 1924.
There is one conclusive reason against this Amendment. We propose, by an Amendment which appears later on the Paper, to put a ground annual in the same position as a feu duty. That raises a larger issue, which will have to be dis-
cussed when we come to that Amendment. Under the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act, 1924, "heritable security," which is our definition of "mortgage," includes a ground annual, and, accordingly, if we were to fall into the trap—I do not say it was designedly laid—of defining our terms with reference to the Act of 1924, the result would be that the debtor in a ground annual would be debarred from passing the tax back to the creditor under the contract of ground annual. I agree that these definitions have to be considered with very great care, and I undertake to consider this matter along with the others. I hope that, with that undertaking, the hon. Member will not press the matter further.

Sir F. THOMSON: While we are on the subject of definitions in these earlier Acts, perhaps I might point out to the Lord Advocate that, in the Lands Consolidation Act, 1868, I find that:
The word 'creditor' shall include the party in whose favour a heritable security is granted and his successors in right thereof.
This is more relevant, I admit, than the first Amendment, but it completely answers the Lord Advocate's criticism of the use of the word "creditor."

Sir T. INSKIP: One of the Lord Advocate's observations has thrown a good deal of light on the way in which this Bill is drafted. He replied to the interjection of one of my hon. Friends that he would find out what the tax means when he came to pay it. That is a principle which, we have long suspected, underlies this Bill. But the Lord Advocate not only suggested that it was quite clear and proper that we should not know until we had to pay what the Bill means; he told us that he does not know what the Bill means.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I am very sorry to interrupt the hon. and learned Gentleman, but I said nothing of the kind. While one welcomes the intervention of an English Member in dealing with Scottish law, I hope he will take the trouble to be accurate when he does intervene.

Sir T. INSKIP: The right hon. Gentleman's truculence will not prevent me from intervening in these Debates, and I have two or three very good reasons for doing so. First of all, it is interesting that we should have the indirect
illumination which the right hon. Gentleman has given of the other part of the Bill, and that we should see what it illuminates. My second justification for intervening is that I am a resident in Scotland, a ratepayer in Scotland, and a voter in Scotland, and I think that that justifies my interposition. I will justify what I said when I declared that the right hon. Gentleman admits that he does not know what the Bill means. He justified the refusal to attempt to define "curtilage" by saying that it was an indefinable term, and that it was better not to attempt to define that which was indefinable—that if a thing is indefinable it is very difficult for anyone to know what it means. If England Members will turn to Sub-section (3, b) of Clause 8, they will find that the word "curtilage" is part of the necessary description of that which is to be valued by the gentleman who will undertake the valuation of this land. It says:
The site of the building (with its curtilage) shall be a land unit.
If we had been discussing this Bill under ordinary conditions, we should, no doubt, have had a discussion on that Clause, and we might have pressed the Solicitor-General as to the meaning of the word "curtilage." It is all very well, when you are not speaking in exact terms or dealing with matters of precise importance, to use the expression "curtilage," but, when Parliament is defining the subject-matter of a valuation, surely it is necessary to ascertain the precise delimitations of that which is to be the subject of valuation. The Lord Advocate says that he is not able to define "curtilage." If he is not able to define "curtilage," how will the valuer be able to define "curtilage"; and, if the valuer cannot define "curtilage," how will the taxpayer know what he is entitled to have valued as a part of the land unit.
The Lord Advocate's admissions show that in Sub-section (3, b) of Clause 8 we have passed a phrase of which nobody can tell the precise meaning. That seems to suggest that, now that we have an opportunity of dealing with the law as regards Scotland, we should at any rate have some definition of that phrase. It may be too late until the Report stage to deal with the expression as referring
to England, but I suggest that the right hon. Gentleman's admission makes it more than ever necessary that we should lay down some meaning for a phrase which is undefinable in English law, and which is unknown to Scots law, apparently, except that, to use the right hon. Gentleman's expression, it has crept into a Scottish Act of Parliament. I hope that the Government, for the sake of the taxpayer, if not for the credit of the Lord Advocate, will do their best to ascertain what they mean by this word in their own Bill. Until they take some pains not merely to define, but to understand and to be able to explain what the Bill means, it ought not to be possible to pass the Clause, though I am afraid the Guillotine will compel us to pass it whether we understand it or not. I hope the right hon. and learned Gentleman will make another attempt here and now to tell us what "curtilage" means either in English or in Scots law.

Sir D. HERBERT: Although I am neither a ratepayer nor a voter in Scotland, I maintain my right to intervene in this discussion. We had not an opportunity of raising this question as to the meaning of curtilage on Clause 8, and now we have from a Minister of the Crown the most amazing statement without exception that I have ever heard made by any Minister even of the present Government. Clearly one has to rub one's eyes to see whether one is really awake when we hear language which might tend to make one think we were trying to pass and to sell, not an Act of Parliament, but a work of fiction for people to read themselves to sleep. A Scottish Law Officer tells us that a subject that is to be valued for the purposes of taxation as set out in this Bill is something the meaning of which is unknown, and he proposes to decline to attempt to define what that subject is that is to be valued and taxed. The Attorney-General not long ago referred to the difficulty of construing Acts of Parliament relating to taxes, and now we have a Scottish Law Officer who proposes to add to them, confessedly, by not attempting to define something of which he says the meaning is doubtful. He is trying to pass an uncertain Act of Parliament which, on his own admission, can only have the result of trying to get
the courts to decide something the meaning of which this House apparently has not been given an opportunity of deciding. We have had protests enough against the evil of throwing upon private individuals the expense of interpreting doubtful Acts of Parliament. Surely it is time we protested against this attempted proposal to pass an uncertain enactment in regard to which the Government themselves say the meaning is not clear. The Lord Advocate has said the Government propose to take into consideration this question of the definition of Scottish law terms. I take the opportunity of suggesting that he should see that his colleagues in the Government before Report come down with some Amendment which will alter Clause 8 so as to get rid of that doubtful word "curtilage."

Mr. MACQU1STEN: I sympathise with the Lord Advocate, because he said that the word "curtilage" was vague and neither he nor any member of his profession knows what it means. I agree that it is vague, but is not that the very reason why we should seize the opportunity of defining it? Is he going to leave it to the valuers or the tax assessors and then come along to the wretched taxpayer and threaten him with a curtilage, which will terrify the poor man into thinking he is to be landed in heavy expense? He will not know what It means either. It will be used by the tax gatherers, no doubt, to exact something which is probably not due. I invite the Lord Advocate to take counsel with the Solicitor-General and see if they cannot together invent a proper definition which will convey to the taxpayer what he is to be taxed on. In criminal law, if you charge a man with something and you cannot define the crime, there is an end to the proceedings. Surely this is legislation gone mad. I have been in one or two Houses of Commons before, and I have said of this House of Commons that it was the nearest thing to a mental hospital. In 1924 an Act was passed, after conference with all the most eminent conveyancers in Scotland, who took counsel and very materially amended the conveyancing law of Scotland. That is the very thing that is scouted in this hurried Bill without definitions, which was conceived by class prejudice out of Henry George.

Mr. BOOTHBY: The Government are falling into increasing disrepute in the country, and the disheartening and alarming thing is that they are bringing the House into discredit and disrepute also. Every Member of the House is being involved in the failures and the discreditable performances of the Government which go on day after day. I am not sure, after listening to the Debate, that the effect upon the mental stability of Members on all sides of the House is not becoming very serious. If this is the sort of thing the Government ask us to discuss, and if this is the method by which they ask us to push it through the House, can you blame anyone for refusing to take the Debate seriously? On this occasion, we are discussing the definition of a term that is used in the English section of the Bill, and which English Members were never able to discuss, because, under the Guillotine, it was never reached. Things have reached their final pitch of farce when the Government ask us to tax curtilages. We ask them to define curtilage, and the Lord Advocate says you cannot define curtilage because it is an undefined thing.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: "Indefinite."

The LORD ADVOCATE: I adhere to every word I said, and I would ask the hon. Member to treat the matter seriously.

Mr. BOOTHBY: Does the right hon. Gentleman think it good legislation, or good policy, to impose taxation upon an indefinite thing and, when hon. Members ask him to be a little more definite, merely to say, "You will find out what it is when you have to pay the money"? It is obvious what will happen. We shall go on trying to press for some form of definition, we shall get no definition, the Guillotine will fall, and the Clause will go through. If the Bill ever reaches the Statute Book, it will enrich the lawyers for the next 20 years. That is the only contribution that it will make to the welfare of the country. We cannot even get from the Government a clear definition of what they intend, not only on this Clause but on any others. We ought to go on pressing the Lord Advocate as long as we can to give us some idea of what the Government intend to tax under this Clause. I should have thought it was an elementary principle of
taxation that the people of the country have a right to be told what it is that they are going to be taxed upon.

Sir ARTHUR STEEL-MAITLAND: The Lord Advocate has asked us to be serious, and therefore I want to put this question to him seriously. Can he now give us a definite answer, one way or the other, whether he will accept this definition or not? It has stood upon the Order Paper for 36 hours or more. He is the legal representative for Scotland and ought by now to have acquainted himself with the facts of the case, and to be in a position to say whether he is prepared to answer or not. There is no justification whatever for his saying that he ought to have time to consider the matter further before the Report stage. Therefore, I ask him whether he is not in a position to tell us, at once and direct, whether these words ought to be inserted or not. It is grossly unfair not to give a direct answer at once when we are working under the Guillotine procedure. If he tries to pass all these things over to the Report stage, it will take up time then which will be very valuable, and they will be brought forward under conditions in which discussion cannot be as free as now.
I have listened for some time to the answers of the Lord Advocate, and a more pitiable spectacle I have seldom seen in these Debates. [Interruption.] I say quite definitely, if I am not out of order, that the Lord Advocate, in giving the answers he has given, is a pitiable spectacle on the Government Front Bench. When we put questions upon definite points to the Solicitor-General on the earlier Clauses, the Solicitor-General had always taken the trouble to read the Bill, and, whether we agreed with him or not, he took the trouble to get up the facts and to be ready with an answer for us. As far as anyone can judge, the Lord Advocate has not even taken the trouble to master the Bill. On this occasion we have asked him about a point which he clearly ought to have known, and it is an injustice to this side of the 'Committee not to give an answer but merely to try and put it off.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I have no intention of replying to the gross personal attack which the right hon. Gentleman in default of argument, and being bankrupt of any ideas, has made upon me. I am well aware that the right hon. Gentleman has been awaiting what he regarded as a favourable opportunity for unburdening himself of his spleen. I should have scant respect for the office I hold if I thought that a speech of that kind deserved reply, and let me tell him here and now, and to his face, that I intend to treat his speech with the indifference and contempt it deserves.

Major COLVILLE: It is with great diffidence that a layman intervenes in a Debate of this kind, but at least he can take some heart from the fact that the lawyers cannot interpret their own language. When a time table was being fixed, I can recall the Lord Advocate saying that this Act would not merely have to be paraphrased to refer to Scotland, but that there would have to be a special adaptation. I ask him this uestion: What is the adaptation of the word "curtilage" in Scotland? The fact that it cannot be defined in England is no reason why he should accept it as far as Scotland is concerned if it cannot be defined there. We wish to know why we have such scant treatment from the Law Officers of the Crown relating to Scottish matters. The right hon. and learned Gentleman has not been very helpful this afternoon. I am not making a personal attack or anything of that kind. The right hon. and learned Member is rather touchy about it. During the two and a-half hours' discussion all that the right hon. and learned Gentleman has done is to say that he will give consideration to certain points. He has made no concessions whatever and has given no definition when we have asked him, and he will not accept our definition although he will not give one himself. He has been very unhelpful in this matter. If ever proof were required that time is far too short for the discussion of Scottish matters, we have had it in the two and a-half hours' discussion this afternoon.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 171; Noes, 264.

Division No. 329.]
AYES.
[6.38 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Ferguson, Sir John
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)


Albery, Irving James
Fielden, E. B.
O'Connor, T. J.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Atholl, Duchess of
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Peake, Captain Osbert


Atkinson, C.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Penny, Sir George


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Ganzonl, Sir John
Perkins, W. R. D.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Boothby, R. J. G.
Gower, Sir Robert
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Ramsbotham, H.


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
G rattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Held, David D. (County Down)


Boyce, Leslie
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Remer, John R.


Bracken, B.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James


Briscoe, Richard George
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Broadbent, Colonel J.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Salmon, Major I.


Buchan, John
Hammersley, S. S.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Hanbury, C.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hartington, Marquess of
Savery, S. S.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Campbell, E. T.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Skelton, A. N.


Carver, Major W. H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Smithers, Waldron


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Chadwick, Capt. Sir Robert Burton
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Chapman, Sir S.
Heward-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Christie, J. A.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Stanley, Hon. O. (Westmorland)


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Hurd, Percy A.
Steel-Maltland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Cohen, Major J. Brunei
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Colfox, Major William Philip
Inskip, Sir Thomas
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Colville, Major D. J.
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Thompson, Luke


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Thomson, Sir F.


Cooper, A. Duff
Latham, H. P. (Scarboro' & Whitby)
Train, J.


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Cranborne, Viscount
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Croom, Johnson, R. P.
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Wayland, Sir William A.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lockwood, Captain J. H.
Wells, Sydney R.


Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Long, Major Hon. Eric
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Macquisten, F. A.
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Dawson, Sir Philip
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Withers, Sir John James


Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.
Marjoribanks, Edward
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Meller, R. J.
Womersley, W. J.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Milne, Wardlaw-, J. S.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)



Elliot, Major Walter E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-S. M.)
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Major the Marquess of Titchfield


Everard, W. Lindsay
Muirhead, A. J.
and Sir Victor Warrender.




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Bowen, J. W.
Cowan, D. M.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Broad, Francis Alfred
Cripps, Sir Stafford


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Brockway, A. Fanner
Daggar, George


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Bromfield, William
Dallas, George


Alpass, J. H.
Bromley, J.
Dalton, Hugh


Ammon, Charles George
Brooke, W.
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)


Angell, Sir Norman
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Davies, D. L. (Pontypridd)


Arnott, John
Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)


Aske, Sir Robert
Buchanan, G.
Day, Harry


Attlee, Clement Richard
Burgess, F. G.
Denman, Hon. R. D.


Ayles, Walter
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Dudgeon, Major C. R.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Caine, Hall-, Derwent
Dukes, C.


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Cameron, A. G.
Duncan, Charles


Barnes, Alfred John
Cape, Thomas
Ede, James Chuter


Barr, James
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Edmunds, J. E.


Batey, Joseph
Charleton, H. C.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Chater, Daniel
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)


Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Church, Major A. G.
Egan, W. H.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Clarke, J. S.
Elmley, Viscount


Benson, G.
Cluse, W. S.
Foot, Isaac


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Cove, William G.
Gardner, J. p. (Hammersmith, N.)




George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Car'vn)
Logan, David Gilbert
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)
Longbottom, A. W.
Sanders, W. S.


Gill, T. H.
Longden, F.
Sandham, E.


Gillett, George M.
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Sawyer, G. F.


Glassey, A. E.
Lunn, William
Sexton, Sir James


Gossling, A. G.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Gould, F.
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
McElwee, A.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
McEntee, V. L.
Sherwood, G. H.


Gray, Milner
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Shield, George William


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
MacLaren, Andrew
Shillaker, J. F.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Shinwell, E.


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Simmons, C. J.


Groves, Thomas E.
McShane, John James
Simon, E. D. (Manch'ter, Withington)


Grundy, Thomas W.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Sinkinson, George


Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Manning, E. L.
Sitch, Charles H.


Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Mansfield, W.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
March, S.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Hardie, David (Rutherglen)
Marcus, M.
Smith, Lees-, Rt. Hon. H. B. (Keighley)


Hardie, G. D. (Springburn)
Markham, S. F.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Harris, Percy A.
Marley, J.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Marshall, Fred
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Haycock, A. W.
Mathers, George
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Hayes, John Henry
Matters, L. W.
Sorensen, R.


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Maxton, James
Stamford, Thomas W.


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Messer, Fred
Stephen, Campbell


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Middleton, G.
Strauss, G. R.


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Mills, J. E.
Sullivan, J.


Herriotts, J.
Milner, Major J.
Sutton, J. E.


Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Montague, Frederick
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Hoffman, P. C.
Morley, Ralph
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Hollins, A.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Tillett, Ben


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Mort, D. L.
Tinker, John Joseph


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Muff, G.
Toole, Joseph


Isaacs, George
Muggeridge, H. T.
Tout, W. J.


Jenkins, Sir William
Murnin, Hugh
Townend, A. E.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Nathan, Major H. L.
Vaughan, David


Johnston, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Noel Baker, P. J.
Viant, S. P.


Jones, Llewellyn-, F.
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Walkden, A. G.


Jones, Rt. Hon Leif (Camborne)
Oldfield, J. R.
Walker, J.


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Wallace, H. W.


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Palin, John Henry.
Watkins, F. C.


Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. (Preston)
Palmer, E. T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Kelly, W. T.
Perry, S. F.
Wellock, Wilfred


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Kinley, J.
Phillips, Dr. Marion
West, F. R.


Kirkwood, D.
Plcton-Turbervill, Edith
Westwood, Joseph


Knight, Holford
Pole, Major D. G.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Lang, Gordon
Potts, John S.
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Price, M. P.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Lathan, G. (Sheffield, Park)
Quibell, D. J. K.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Raynes, W. R.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Lawrence, Susan
Richards, R.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Ritson, J.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Leach, W.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Romerll, H. G.
Wise, E. F.


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Lees, J.
Rothschild, J. de
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Leonard, W.
Rowson, Guy



Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Mr. Thurtle and Mr. Paling.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I beg to move, in page 30, line 12, to leave out "1929," and to insert instead thereof "1930."

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: This slip in the Bill is typical of the sloppy drafting in every part of the Bill. It is particularly typical of the drafting of this Clause. It is disgraceful that the Government cannot draft a Bill, but it is characteristic of their legislation during the past two years. It is utterly wrong
that the House of Commons should have legislation sent to it in this way. It is a disgrace to the Government and to this House.

Amendment agreed to.

Sir F. THOMSON: I beg to move, in page 30, line 21, to leave out paragraph (h).
This paragraph relates to Clause 11 (6) in which there is provision for appeals from valuations. That Sub-section provides that
A referee may order that the cost of any appeal to him incurred by any party to the appeal be paid by any other party thereto, and any such order as to costs shall have effect as if it were an order of the High Court, save that it shall not be enforced as such except by leave of that court or of a judge thereof.
There is no such provision as regards Scotland. If an order of a referee cannot be enforced in England without leave of the High Court, why should not the same rule prevail in Scotland? Will not the Lord Advocate leave the law for Scotland exactly as it is for England in regard to this matter? A decree arbitral can be recorded only if there has been agreement between the parties. It is only in these circumstances that execution or summary enforcement can follow. Otherwise, the arbiter has no power to enforce an order. A decree arbitral can be recorded only if in the submission to the arbiter there is a clause agreed to by both parties consenting to registration for execution. The whole thing depends upon consent. I do not see why an order of a referee in regard to costs should be on a different footing in Scotland than in England. If such an order is made in Scotland, as in England, it should not be enforced as such except by leave of the Court. Therefore, I hope that the Lord Advocate will consent to making the law, which may be of great importance to many individuals, uniform, in the two countries.

The LORD ADVOCATE: This is purely a point of procedure. The Clause is right as it stands. If we were to insert a provision requiring such matters to go to the Court of Session, it would be departing from the recognised procedure in Scotland. The effect of the Clause is that when a referee makes an order as to costs, as he is entitled to do under the provisions of the Bill, that order can be summarily enforced, and if we were to require an application to the Court for confirmation, it would mean that we should have to proceed by way of action, which is alien to our Scottish procedure. After this explanation, I hope that the hon. and learned Member will not press the Amendment.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. E. BROWN: I beg to move, in page 30, line 29, to insert the words:
() For Sub-section (2) of Section eleven there shall be substituted the following:—
(2) Within such time as may be prescribed by rules made under this Section, after a notice of refusal has been served upon any person under the last foregoing Sub-section, that person may appeal from the refusal to one of the panel of referees appointed under Part I of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, and any party to such appeal, if aggrieved by the decision of the referee, may appeal therefrom to the lands valuation judges appointed under the provisions of the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Acts, whose decision shall be final, and the provisions of the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Acts in regard to stating and signing a case on appeal shall apply to the referee in the same way and to the same effect as they apply to a land valuation appeal court under the provisions of the said Acts.

As the Amendment stands on the Order Paper, it is to leave out paragraph (i) and to insert the new paragraph. To leave out paragraph (i) would be more than I desire to do, because that would remove entirely the discretion of the High Court. With permission—I have previously consulted the Deputy-Chairman—I wish to move the Amendment in the new form. I desire to raise two points of very great substance. Under Clause 11 (2), it is provided that both for England and Scotland there is no right of appeal on facts. There is only a right of appeal on points of law. In my Amendment, I propose that there shall be an appeal, not merely on points of law, but on points of fact, and I propose for Scotland an appropriate tribunal, which will steer a middle course. Clause 11 (2) provides, unlike the Finance Act, 1910, which provides for an appeal to the High Court, that a person aggrieved may appeal to one of the panel of referees appointed under Part I of the Finance Act, 1910, and the decision of the referee is to be final, subject to special cases being stated where required on points of law to the Court of Session in Scotland, or, if the cases are less than £500 in value, to the Sheriff Court.

The panel of referees is to be appointed for Scotland by a reference committee and the persons to be appointed by that reference committee must be fellows of the Surveyors' Institute or other persons having experience in the valuation of land. There will be very great difficulties in carrying out the valuation under the Bill in the way of machinery, and not merely in the interpretation of the law. There will be
legitimate differences between the valuator and the taxpayer as to matters of fact. The valuation of land, especially in the large areas where the circumstances are very diversified, are bound to be intensified. Where the valuation is to be made on the assumption that the buildings on the site are non-existent, there will be no exact science in the valuation and, therefore, there must be a very large scope for legitimate differences of opinion as between the valuator on the one hand and the taxpayer on the other. Difficult questions will arise apart from questions of law. There is no guidance on principle, precedence or practice in this matter.

We are all working in the dark, not merely framing the law but setting up tribunals which have had no experience of this kind of thing either in England or in Scotland, and we ought to be very careful to safeguard the rights of the taxpayer. There is nothing to guide the referees in their work. In cities like Edinburgh and Glasgow it will not be one referee on the panel that will do the work, but each particular referee will bring his own private judgment to bear on the cases that come before him. There will be no uniformity.

Mr. MacLAREN: I hope the hon. Member is not making a charge against the Scottish assessors. They know pretty well the matters to be covered.

Mr. BROWN: My reply to the hon. Member is that he has not followed my argument. I am making no charge against the assessors. I have made that clear. They know their business, but the circumstances in Edinburgh and Glasgow differ so greatly, even inside one street, that it is quite possible there may be great diversity of opinions given, and rightly given, according to the facts brought before the particular referees. It will do the hon. Member and his friends no good to try to avoid difficulties. There will be difficulties. An appeal to the Court of Session on points of law will not touch the difficulties to which I have referred. The prime injustices will not he on points of law but on points of fact. The Bill will raise innumerable points of fact. The hon. Member must agree that the suggested new Clause, on
a mathematical basis, is bound to raise more problems of fact than the original draft of the Bill.
7.0 p.m.
Therefore, the Committee ought to realise that there must be an appeal for the aggrieved citizen on other than points of law. In the experience under the Derating Act there is powerful argument for such a course. If there had been no appeal on points of fact under that Act, there would have been immense trouble and injustice. The machinery ought to be so devised as to minimise trouble and injustice. My Amendment seeks the middle way. It gives a modified form of appeal. It provides for an appeal to the lands valuation judges of Scotland, a tribunal which is the final tribunal in Scotland under the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Acts. It had its being in the year 1854. It understands this problem and will therefore be able to stabilise by its vast knowledge over this long period of years, the whole body of practice for the whole of Scotland. It is a tribunal which is universally regarded as being fair and a tribunal with an accurate knowledge of the problems of valuation. The Corporation of Edinburgh feel very strongly about this matter, and other bodies are also concerned with matters of fact. This will be cheaper and quicker, will be rooted in Scottish 7.0 p.m. valuation practice, and will establish to a large extent the principles and practice of valuation all over the country. I hope we shall not be told that it is not necessary to have an appeal or that, if it is necessary, it should be brought into conformity with the Income Tax appeal in Great Britain. This is a case where Scottish law and practice demand a separate court, and I shall have the sympathy of the Committee with me on the major point, namely, that there ought to be an appeal on such vast new procedure, not merely on points of law but on points of fact.

Sir P. FORD: I am very happy to support this Amendment. As the hon. Member has already explained, the reason why a small alteration in the form of the Amendment was permitted was that we did not want to rule out the paragraph in the Bill which permits appeals on points of law to the High Court and county courts and to the Court of Session and the sheriff court. It seemed to us that it would be a pity to have
points of law turned on to the Lands Valuation Court, which has more strictly defined topics to deal with. We, therefore, decided not to press for the removal of that paragraph and I am at one with the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) in pressing for the main part of this Amendment. It is not founded on the view of theorists, but on the view of people with more practical experience than the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) who believe that there is a need to have a system of appeal to a competent court in order to have something approaching uniformity in the decisions arrived at on kindred subjects in this new and technical valuation. On the one hand, then, we feel that, where the law will require careful consideration, it would be a pity to rule out an appeal on those subjects to the Court of Session and the sheriff court. On the other hand, we feel that, when we are dealing with such a technical subject in which, as has been pointed out by the reporters to the Edinburgh Corporation, one has to assume conditions almost humanly impossible to assume and, in doing so, one cannot be sure whether under the Statute one is right to make those assumptions and when one has to make those assumptions in a great city like Edinburgh, there are bound to be differences between the referee and the person asked to accept his view and between the different referees. It is therefore, most important that one should have what is at once a cheap, speedy and efficient remedy. All the history of this Lands Valuation Court has gone to build it up in the confidence of the people of Scotland. This is a very important matter both for the easier working of the Bill and for justice to the citizens of Scotland. As we have decided not to ask for the removal of paragraph (i) which refers to the High Court and Court of Session, that will entail the Lord Advocate going back and making a slight extension in Sub-section (3) of Clause 25. It there says:
Any appeal to the High Court under this Part of the Act shall be to a single judge of the High Court to be nominated by the Lord Chancellor.
It is perfectly obvious that, in applying a similar provision to Scotland, we shall have to put in a form of words which will show that instead of the Lord Chancellor we mean the Lord President of the Court of Session. I mention this be-
cause we should hardly have been doing our duty if, in bringing forward this Amendment, we did not mention what came casually to our notice to-day. I would point out the futility of proceeding with this Bill under the Guillotine when we find out things like that, which are due to the ridiculous way in which the application Clauses are drafted and to the way in which the Guillotine falls. I would conclude by strongly urging the Lord Advocate to accept this Amendment.

The LORD ADVOCATE: The Amendment proposed by the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) undoubtedly raises a point of very great importance, upon which the Government would be quite prepared to take the view of the Committee, but we think it right that the Committee should apperciate what exactly this Amendment means. If this Amendment were given effect to, the result would be two-fold. In the first place, you would be allowing appeals on questions of fact in Scotland, whereas in England you are only going to allow appeals on questions of law.

Mr. E. BROWN: It ought to be done there.

The LORD ADVOCATE: At any rate, it has not been done. What I am concerned to point out to the Committee is that you will be making an anomaly on that point. There is an additional and more serious objection. If you accepted the Amendment proposed, the result would be that the Valuation Appeal Court would be the final court of appeal. There is a very great deal to be said no doubt for that, but the Committee will keep in view that they are here dealing with a tax imposed by an Imperial Statute and that it is in the highest degree undesirable that one should have judges in Scotland taking one view of the provisions of the Act and judges in England taking another view. That difficulty arose under the De-rating Act, and it led to consequences of the most inconvenient kind. If this provision is going to be accepted by the Committee, it would be desirable that we should insert a provision which would secure the right of appeal to the House of Lords, because, if you do not do that, you are going to have inevitable divergences of judicial interpertation of the terms of a Statute which applies to
both countries. When you are dealing with a taxing Statute, nothing could be more undesirable. It does not matter in the least that you do not get appeals from the Valuation Court to the House of Lords at the present time, because it deals with matters affecting Scotland only, but, when you come to a matter affecting both countries, then the situation is altered. If the Committee agree with me in thinking that the right of appeal to the House of Lords should be maintained, then it is for the Committee to consider whether it is not desirable that we should maintain uniformity for both countries in this matter. I think it would be wrong to allow appeals on fact in Scotland and refuse them in England. This is pre-eminently a matter on which the Government are prepared to take the sense of the Committee. If it is the will of the Committee that this should be considered, we are prepared to give an undertaking to consider the matter and to embody the collective view in a Clause which would deal with the whole situation. If that would meet the wish of the Committee, then I suggest the Amendment should be withdrawn.

Mr. E. BROWN: Do I understand the Lord Advocate to say that he wants a free vote in order to get the mind of the Committee or that he wants it later on Report? It is very serious because there ought to be for all citizens, whether in England, Scotland or Wales, a right of appeal on fact. If the Lord Advocate will leave it to a free vote of the Committee, I am prepared to go to a Division., but I am not prepared to leave it to a vague statement that later on we may have something. It is a point of great substance and will be so felt in the country when it is understood. It is not understood at the present moment that there is no right of appeal. This point is taken very seriously by those associated with me. As to the House of Lords, I cannot see any objection, because I cannot imagine the valuation judges not having regard to what is hapenning in England. Therefore, on points of law, the high court of Scotland will have its say and there might be an appeal from the valuation judges to the House of Lords. The Government will be wise if, in order to help their own valuation and in order to give a
sense of justice to those affected, they accept the Amendment subject to revision on the Report stage.

Sir P. FORD: What is the Lord Advocate proposing to do? Is the idea that he, with the Attorney-General, is going, on the Report stage, to produce a Clause applicable to the corresponding cases in both countries? If so, when does he want to leave it to a free vote of the House? These are the questions I want to ask the Lord Advocate.

The LORD ADVOCATE: We are willing to take the substance of this Amendment, but it is undesirable to take it in the form in which it now stands, because we are anxious to correlate the position in the two countries.

Sir D. HERBERT: This is an important matter from the point of view of England. As far as I know we have nothing in this country equivalent to the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act, or to the lands valuation judges. Has the Lord Advocate any idea how it is possible, without the institution of land valuation judges in this country, to coordinate the procedure in the two countries, and to what judges does he suggest there should be an appeal in England on questions of fact? I agree with the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) in regard to an appeal on questions of fact, and I hope it will be possible for it to be done. I hope the Government will make some arrangements which will give the citizens in England the same right of appeal on questions of fact as it is proposed to give to the people of Scotland.

Mr. E. BROWN: I am much obliged to the Lord Advocate, He may find it undesirable to have these amateur words in the Bill, but, on the understanding that he will meet the point of substance, both with regard to England and Scotland, I beg leave to withdraw.

Sir T. INSKIP: Before the Amendment is withdrawn, I think we should have a clear understanding on this matter. As I understand it, the way the matter is left is that the consideration which is to be given to the Scottish position, with a view to giving an appeal on questions of fact, will also apply to England. If the President of the Board of Trade is able to confirm that, we may dispose of this Amendment in the
appropriate fashion. I was under the impression that that was the understanding. It is most desirable that the matter should be cleared up one way or the other, and, after what the Lord Advocate has said as to the desirability of having the same system in the two countries, I hope I may get the assurance for which I am asking.

The LORD ADVOCATE: The hon. and learned Member must not tie me down in a matter of this kind because there are important differences as between the procedure in Scotland and the procedure in England. In England there is an appeal to a single judge, but in Scotland an appeal of this kind is an appeal to three judges. I cannot give any undertaking in matters of this kind, but I am quite prepared to give the undertaking that we appreciate the importance of securing uniformity in matters of this kind. I hope the hon. and learned Member will not press me further.

Sir T. INSKIP: What the Lord Advocate has said is quite sufficient.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sir R. HORNE: I beg to move, in page 30, line 30, at the beginning, to insert the words:
Section twenty-six shall not apply and
I have one or two other Amendments on this Clause, and I hope I may be able to refer to them on this Amendment. I am sure that the Lord Advocate will agree with me that the language used throughout the whole of Clause 26 is language which does not apply at all to the law of Scotland. For example, there is no reference to the system of feuing. It begins by a reference to land subject to a lease granted for a term of years. No doubt some people think that the feuing system in Scotland is a type of leasehold, but, in fact, it has nothing whatever to do with leasehold, and therefore that Clause does not apply. If you read farther on in the same Clause, you find a reference to the estate owner, a person whose existence we do not recognise in Scotland, and there is also an important paragraph, paragraph (b) of the same Clause, which has no reference whatsoever to anything we know in Scotland. Indeed, there is nothing in the Clause which would preserve the right of the Scottish taxpayer unless something is introduced in the
nature of the proposals I have on the Paper. I have, for instance, a proposal to introduce a new paragraph (k) (ii) into this Clause which reads:
(ii) where under Section nine of the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act, 1874, a personal right to any land unit has vested in an heir by his survivance of the person to whom he is entitled to succeed, such heir shall not be deemed to be the owner of such land unit if he shall, within the period of six months after the succession has opened to him, renounce the succession, but after the lapse of said period of six months, if he shall not have renounced the succession, such heir shall be deemed for the purpose of the charge of the tax to have been the owner as from the date when the succession opened to him.
May I explain what this means. In Clause 26, Sub-section (1), paragraph (b), we find that
where under Section nine of the Administration of Estates Act, 1925, the estate of any person who died intestate is vested in the Probate Judge, that judge shall not be deemed to be the owner of any land unit comprised in the estate, but upon administration being granted in respect thereof the administrator shall be deemed for the purposes of the charge of the tax to have been the owner as from the date of the death.
Land in Scotland when the owner dies does not fall into the hands of the administrator at all, and there is no such person as a Probate Judge who has anything to do with it. The position is that the heir succeed to the property and, therefore, the Amendment I suggest is to put the Scottish heir, according to the Scottish system, into the same position of privilege as to the period at which his ownership is taken up. In England his ownership, and therefore his liability, does not begin until administration has been granted in his favour. If you wish to apply a similar rule for Scotland to an heir to heritable property, he is in this position. In former days he succeeded, and if he took up the succession he became liable to all the debts and obligations of the previous owner, no matter how small the value of the property might be, if he took it up. A more lenient law passed some years ago made him liable only to the extent of the property taken up, and he had a year, what is called an annus deliberandi, to decide whether he should take up the succession. In later times that period was limited to six months, and now the heir, while he automatically succeeds to the property, need not say for six months whether he will take up the succession,
and during those six months no creditors can act against the property.
I suggest that my proposal in paragraph (k) (ii) will meet the situation, and I feel sure that now that the matter has been put to the Lord Advocate he must agree that the proposed Amendment is the only way in which succession is taken up in Scotland, and it is the only way in which ownership begins upon which any taxation could possibly be founded. I commend the proposal to the Lord Advocate and to the Committee. If something like this is not done, we shall be applying to Scotland a system of English administration which does not exist in Scotland and which nobody bas ever suggested should be applied to Scotland. If hon. Members will refer again to Clause 26, and to Sub-section (2) of that Clause, they will find a series of provisions which again are not apt in their reference to Scotland, but they are all covered I think by the further Amendment I have down to this Clause and that is to insert:
(k)—(i) leases containing an obligation upon the granter to renew the same from time to time at fixed periods, or upon the termination of a life or lives or otherwise shall be deemed to be leases for a term exceeding fifty years provided such leases shall by the terms of such obligation be renewable from time to time so as to endure for a period exceeding fifty years.
I hope these Amendments have been studied by the Lord Advocate and his advisers, as they cover the whole situation. We cannot have the system of law in Scotland as it exists and at the same time have imposed upon us terms and rules of procedure which are unknown in our courts. This is a matter which, I think, should be attended to at once. I am not raising these points in order to be critical. I sympathise with the Lord Advocate and the Scottish Office in this matter, because the Bill has been so hurriedly prepared that no one has had time to give full consideration to these matters, and I am not surprised that these Clauses have been thrown together in this higgledy-piggledy way and that a whole lot of English phraseology which does not apply to Scotland has been introduced. The Amendments I have indicated substitute something entirely new for Clause 26, except the definition of ownership which I will come to later, and unless they are accepted we shall
have in this Bill something which cannot possibly be applied to Scotland.

The CHAIRMAN (Sir Robert Young): I must put the Amendment to insert the words "Section 26 shall not apply and".

Sir R. HORNE: I have referred to my other Amendment because I thought it would save the time of the Committee, and I hope I did so with your consent.

The LORD ADVOCATE: In substance these Amendments, the first of which has just been moved by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne), divide themselves into two branches, one relating to the definition of owner in the Bill, as applied to Scotland, and the other dealing with the position of the heir who succeeds by survival. As to the first branch I ask the Committee to observe what we have done in this part of the application Clause. In paragraph (j) we define the term "owner" as that term is used in the Bill, and we say that an owner:
in relation to any land subject to a lease granted for a term exceeding 50 years which has commenced means the tenant under the lease.
That is perfectly plain. In Scotland we have long leases, although not to a very large extent, and what we do is to say that the tenant under a long lease in Scotland is to be in the same position as the tenant under a long lease in England—that is to say, the owner for the purposes of the Bill.

Sir R. HORNE: I am not proposing that that part of the Clause should be left out. I am not making any demur to what the right hon. and learned Gentleman has just read.

The LORD ADVOCATE: The right hon. Gentleman will observe that under the next sub-head of that paragraph we go on to deal with the position of the life-renter, and we state that "owner "
in relation to any other land means, in the case of land subject to a life-rent, the life-renter, and in the case of land under an entail, the institute or heir of entail in possession, and in any other case, the owner of the fee.
Then, in order to complete the matter it is necessary to turn to page 32 of the Bill, paragraph (r) and it will be seen that there we provide that for
the purposes of Clauses 19 and 20 of the Bill any land unit, in respect of which a feu duty is payable, shall be deemed to be subject to a lease granted for a term of 50 years which has commenced. Therefore, the scheme in relation to Scotland is plain enough. We are putting the tenant under a long lease in the position of a leaseholder in England. We are putting the vassal in feu in the position of a leaseholder in England. That point will arise very sharply upon a later Amendment, and I am well aware that it involves a large question of controversy, but I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that the definition in the Bill is quite clear. As regards the definition suggested in the Amendments I am bound, with all respect, to say that we have considered it very carefully and that it appears to us to be unintelligible. Let me read it to the Committee:
Leases containing an obligation upon the granter to renew the same from time to time at fixed periods or upon the termination of a life or lives or otherwise shall be deemed to be leases for a term exceeding 50 years.
It is intelligible up to that point, but let the Committee observe what follows:
Provided such leases shall by the terms of such obligation be renewable from time to time so as to endure for a period exceeding 50 years.
That may mean something, but I am bound to confess that, although we have studied it very carefully, we cannot attach any intelligible meaning to it at all. I doubt very much if this Amendment is the handiwork of the right hon. Gentleman. I have a very strong feeling that a hand other than his has drafted it.

Sir K1NGSLEY WOOD: Some Liberal draftsman.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Woolwich (Sir K. Wood) gets his Amendments drafted by Liberal draftsmen or not, but I think that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Billhead himself will see that there is a great deal of difficulty in this Amendment as it stands. Frankly, I can attach no meaning to it whatever. Accordingly, we feel compelled to refuse the first branch of the Amendments, and, as regards the second branch, the effect would be—to give to the heir who succeeds to land, a period of six months in
which to say whether he will take up succession or renounce succession.

Sir R. HORNE: He has that right by law.

The LORD ADVOCATE: He has the survivor's personal right in regard to succession, but, for purposes of taxation, surely you cannot put a landowner in the position of having six months within which to make up his mind whether he is going to renounce succession or not. I cannot take the view that there is any such right at present recognised by the law and, for the reasons which I have given, the Government feel unable to accept these Amendments.

Sir R. HORNE: Does the Lord Advocate really suggest leaving the Bill in a shape which will apply to Scottish heritable properties the system of a probate judge—the system of administration in England—when we have nothing of the kind in Scotland.

The LORD ADVOCATE: Surely the right hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. We are not applying the provision relating to the probate judge to Scotland at all. It does not require to be excluded here. It is obviously a matter which does not arise.

Sir R. HORNE: Then will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say when does the heir become the owner and subject to the taxation? It is plain that under the English system he does not become subject to the taxation until administration has been granted in his favour. The only way in which administration is granted in favour of the heir in Scotland is when he determines that he is going to take up the succession. In that case, when is the heir to become liable for the taxation?

The LORD ADVOCATE: I should not think that that matter raises any difficulty. I should say that the heir becomes liable to the taxation when he becomes the owner of the land, and that is when he succeeds. As far as Scotland is concerned, I have no reason to believe that there will be any difficulty in determining when he becomes the owner.

Sir R. HORNE: The Lord Advocate might treat this matter a little more seriously. This is a proposal altering
the whole law of Scotland—in a definition of ownership—with regard to heirs taking up their succession. If that is what the right hon. and learned Gentleman means, then he should put his proposal into some positive form so that the House of Commons can consider it. But in Committee upon a Bill, which does not deal with that great topic at all, to say that you are going to alter the whole of our Scottish system of the administration of estates, to which there is succession by survival, is trifling with the House of Commons and violating all the principles by which Parliament has been guided in the past in dealing with solemn matters of legislation.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: I am surprised that the Lord Advocate should say that the first part of this Amendment is obscure, because it seems to me to be perfectly clear and reasonable. The right hon. and learned Gentleman raised some question as to who drafted the Amendment, but I suggest that the Government, in connection with the drafting of this Bill, might have called in the services of whoever drafted the Amendment, because it is more lucid than the Clauses of the Bill. The Amendment states that leases containing an obligation upon the grantor to renew the same from time to time at fixed periods, or upon the termination of a life or lives or otherwise, shall be deemed to be leases for a term exceeding 50 years, provided that the cumulative effect of one or other of those two conditions shall, by the terms of such obligations, be limited to a period exceeding 50 years. If under those conditions it is not brought up to 50 years, then this will not apply.
I join with the statement of my right hon. Friend the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne) in regard to the alteration of the law and the application of the English law to Scottish successions. It is certainly going to place the Scottish heir in a rather anomalous position. He will not know whether he is or is not liable to the tax. Before he makes up his mind whether or not to take up the succession, which is opened up to him, he will want to know whether it is not what is called a damnosa hereditas, that is to say, an objectionable heritage which would involve more liabilities than advantages. Very soon, I think, most of the land of
this country will be in that condition. I have always said that nobody really owns land; that the land that the land owns the man, and, with taxation of this kind imposed upon it, there will soon be no wish on the part of people to take up land. We might at least grant the heir a six months' period of grace and to give him the opportunity of making up his mind.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I think it might have been better if the hon. and learned Member for Argyllshire (Mr. Macquisten), before associating himself with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Home) regarding the injustice done to Scotland in this matter, had been at pains to ascertain what is the position in England. I do not pretend to speak with any authority as regards the position in England, but I am told that the position is that the heir succeeds on the death of the ancestor in exactly the same way as the heir in Scotland succeeds on the death of the ancestor. Accordingly, there is no discrimination at all, but, if we were to accept the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman, there would be discrimination against the revenue in the case of Scotland, and we cannot accept that proposal for a single moment. As regards the rest of the Amendment, I have already explained to the Committee that it is utterly unintelligible, and we have not heard any explanation of it either from the hon. and learned Member for Argyllshire or from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hillhead.

Mr. CROOM-JOHNSON: We cannot allow the last statement of the Lord Advocate to pass unchallenged. I should not have intervened in this Scottish Debate had it not been for that reference to the law of England. I can only assume that the Lord Advocate misheard what was said to him. The system under which the heir took the land in England was abolished in 1897 by the Land Transfer Act of that year. Land does not vest in the heir in England. The situation in England is that the land now vests at first in the executor under the will, or, if there is no executor, it vests as soon as administration is granted in the administrator. If the debts of the deceased are not sufficiently discharged out of personalty, the executors or the administrator, as the case may be, have
the duty cast upon them of raising the money out of realty and, subject to that, if the will does not devise the property, it would go to the person who, before 1397, was the heir. I cannot help feeling that the reason advanced by the Lord Advocate is the worst reason to which I have listened, why this matter should not be given examination. Having regard to the statements which we have heard it seems to demand consideration. If the rest of the reasons based upon Scottish law are as good as the reasons based upon English law which the Lord Advocate has given us, all I can say is that I hope the Bill will remain in the form in which it is. I shall rejoice at the efforts which will no doubt be made by those in Scotland to drive a coach and four through it, as it deserves.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I understand that when an owner dies in England his administrator will became liable to the tax under this Bill. If I am wrong, perhaps the hon. and learned Member will contradict me. If that is a true statement of the position, and the House were to give effect to the Amendment, there would be no person liable for the tax in Scotland for a period of six months after the death of the owner. That is

the effect of the Amendment, and it is the intention of the Mover of the Amendment. In the event of an owner dying in England, is there an interval of six months before the tax attaches? That is a simple question, and surely we can have an answer.

Mr. CROOM-JOHNSON: The answer is as simple as A, B, C. Under the Bill there is a charge on the land in respect of the duty, and that land cannot be parted with by administrators, executors, or anyone else until that has been discharged. The situation with regard to the administrator is also simple. Until administration is granted in the English Court to the administrator, there is no persons as an individual who can be charged, but the Clause on page 26, to which reference has been already made, shows that upon administration being granted the liability of the administrator dates back to the date of the administration. That is exactly the same thing as, I understand, is being proposed in the Amendment.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 212; Noes, 258.

Division No. 330.]
AYES.
[7.48 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Butt, Sir Alfred
Dawson, Sir Philip


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.


Albery, Irving James
Campbell, E. T.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Carver, Major W. H.
Eden, Captain Anthony


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Castle Stewart, Earl of
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cautley, Sir Henry S
Elliot, Major Walter E.


Astor, Maj. Hon. John J. (Kent Dover)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)


Astor, Viscountess
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Everard, W. Lindsay


Atholl, Duchess of
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Atkinson, C.
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.)
Ferguson, Sir John


Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Chadwick, Capt. Sir Robert Burton
Fielden, E. B.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Ford, Sir P. J.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L


Balniel, Lord
Chapman, Sir S.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Christie, J. A.
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Beaumont, M. W.
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Ganzonl, Sir John


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Colfox, Major William Philip
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Colman, N. C. D.
Gower, Sir Robert


Bird, Ernest Roy
Colville, Major D. J.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Boothby, R. J. G.
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cooper, A. Duff
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)


Boyce, Leslie
Cranborne, Viscount
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Bracken, B.
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.


Broadbent, Colonel J.
Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)


Buchan, John
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Hammersley, S. S.


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Hanbury, C


Buckingham, Sir H.
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hartington, Marquess of


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Butler, R. A.
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Muirhead, A. J.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Stanley, Hon. O. (Westmorland)


Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
O'Connor, T. J.
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)


Hurd, Percy A.
O'Neill, Sir H.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Iveagh, Countess of
Peake, Captain Osbert
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Penny, Sir George
Thompson, Luke


Kindersley, Major G. M.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Thomson, Sir F.


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Perkins, W. R. D.
Thomson, Mitchell-, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Latham, H. P. (Scarboro' & Whitby)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Power, Sir John Cecil
Train, J.


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Ramsbotham, H.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Lockwood, Captain J. H.
Renter, John R.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Long, Major Hon. Eric
Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Wells, Sydney R.


Macdonald, Sir. M. (Inverness)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Macquisten, F. A.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Salmon, Major I.
Withers, Sir John James


Margesson, Captain H. D.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Marjoribanks, Edward
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Womersley, W. J.


Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Meller, R. J.
Savery, S. S.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome



Milne, Wardlaw-, J. S.
Skelton, A. N.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Captain Wallace and Sir Victor


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Warrender.


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Smithers, Waldron



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Davies, D. L. (Pontypridd)
Herriotts, J.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Day, Harry
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hoffman, P. C.


Alpass, J. H.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hollins, A.


Ammon, Charles George
Dukes, C.
Hopkin, Daniel


Angell, Sir Norman
Duncan, Charles
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Arnott, John
Ede, James Chuter
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Aske, Sir Robert
Edmunds, J. E.
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Attlee, Clement Richard
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Isaacs, George


Ayles, Walter
Egan, W. H.
Jenkins, Sir William


Baker, John (Wotverhampton, Bilston)
Elmley, Viscount
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Johnston, Rt. Hon. Thomas


Barnes, Alfred John
Foot, Isaac
Jones, Llewellyn-, F.


Barr, James
Freeman, Peter
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)


Batey, Joseph
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Car'vn)
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. (Preston)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)


Benson, G.
Gill, T. H.
Kelly, W. T.


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Gillett, George M.
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Glassey, A. E.
Kinley, J.


Bowen, J. W.
Gossling, A. G.
Kirkwood, D.


Broad, Francis Alfred
Gould, F.
Knight, Holford


Brockway, A. Fenner
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Lang, Gordon


Bromfield, William
Graham Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Brooke, W.
Gray, Milner
Lathan, G. (Sheffield, Park)


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Law, Albert (Bolton)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Law, A. (Rossendale)


Buchanan, G.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lawrence, Susan


Burgess, F. G.
Groves, Thomas E.
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks, W. R. Elland)
Grundy, Thomas W.
Lawson, John James


Caine, Hall, Derwent
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)


Cameron, A. G.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Leach, W.


Cape, Thomas
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Chater, Daniel
Hardie, David (Rutherglen)
Lees, J.


Clarke, J. S.
Hardie, G. D. (Springburn)
Leonard, W.


Cluse, W. S.
Harris, Percy A.
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Cove, William G.
Haycock, A. W.
Logan, David Gilbert


Cripps, Sir Stafford
Hayes, John Henry
Long bottom, A. W.


Daggar, George
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Longden, F.


Dallas, George
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Lovat-Fraser, J. A.




Lunn, William
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Perry, S. F.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


McElwee, A.
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Sorensen, R.


McEntee, V. L.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Stamford, Thomas W.


McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Pole, Major D. G.
Stephen, Campbell


MacLaren, Andrew
Potts, John S.
Strauss, G. R.


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Price, M. P.
Sullivan, J.


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Pybus, Percy John
Sutton, J. E.


Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Quibell, D. J. K.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


McShane, John James
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Rathbone, Eleanor
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Manning, E. L.
Raynes, W. R.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Mansfield, W.
Richards, R.
Thurtle, Ernest


March, S.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Tinker, John Joseph


Marcus, M.
Ritson, J.
Toole, Joseph


Markham, S. F.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Tout, W. J.


Marley, J.
Romerll, H. G.
Townend, A. E.


Marshall, Fred
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Vaughan, David


Mathers, George
Rothschild, J. de
Viant, S. P.


Matters, L. W.
Rowson, Guy
Walkden, A. G.


Maxton, James
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Walker, J.


Messer, Fred
Samuel Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Watkins, F. C.


Middleton, G.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Mills, J. E.
Sanders, W. S.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Joslah


Milner, Major J.
Sandham, E.
Wellock, Wilfred


Montague, Frederick
Sawyer, G. F.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Sexton, Sir James
Westwood, Joseph


Morley, Ralph
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Mort, D. L.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Muff, G.
Sherwood, G. H.
Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)


Muggeridge, H. T.
Shield, George William
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Murnin, Hugh
Shillaker, J. F.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Nathan, Major H. L.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Wilson C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Noel Baker, P. J.
Simmons, C. J.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Oldfield, J. R.
Sinkinson, George
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Sitch, Charles H.
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Palin, John Henry
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)



Paling, Wilfrid
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Palmer, E. T.
Smith, Lees., Rt. Hon. H. B. (Keighley)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.




Charleton.

The CHAIRMAN: I understand that the right hon. Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Home) is to move the Amendment, in page 31, line 13, to leave out paragraph (m). It would be a good thing to take out paragraphs (n) and (o) together with it.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I suggest to you that paragraph (o) deals with the question whether previous agreements are to be interfered with or not. That is a different question from the question of feu duties, which arises on paragraphs (m) and (n). I am sure everyone will be willing to have paragraphs (m) and (n) taken together.

Mr. BARR: The whole subject of contracts is involved in this question of feu duties. Paragraph (o) is very relevant to the other two paragraphs.

The CHAIRMAN: We will take paragraphs (m) and (n) together, and I will save any Amendment that it may be necessary to save.

Sir R. HORNE: I beg to move in page 31, line 13, to leave out paragraph (m).
The provision which I propose to leave out is to the following effect:
(m) where the person on whom the tax chargeable in respect of any land unit is liable in payment in respect of that unit of any feu duty he shall on paying the tax for any year of charge be entitled to recover from the person who was the superior on the first day of January in that year a sum equal to one-twelfth of the feu duty payable in respect of that year or to the whole amount of the tax so paid, whichever is the less, and any sum so recoverable from any person may be deducted from the instalment of feu duty, if any, payable to him next after the date on which the tax is paid. Provided that, where two or more land units are subject to a feu duty which has not been allocated, the sum recoverable as aforesaid from the person to whom such feu duty is payable shall be, in respect of each unit, either one-twelfth of such part of the total feu duty as bears the same proportion thereto as the land value of that unit bears to the total of the land values of all the units subject to the feu duty, or the whole amount of the tax paid in respect of the unit, whichever is the less.
8.0 p.m.
Terms are used in that paragraph which perhaps will require some explanation for those hon. Members who are not learned in Scots law, and I will say 8.0 p.m. something about the system of land tenure in Scotland, which
is founded upon a feu charter. Many hon. Members know that in Scotland land is held upon a feudal system and ultimately from the Sovereign. The ultimate superior is the Sovereign. There are now, after many hundreds of years, very many intermediate superiors between the Sovereign and the ultimate vassal who holds the ground. In early times there were various forms of service, which were given both to the Sovereign and to intermediate superiors, in respect of the grant of a feu. The grant of a feu, however, now and for a long period of time, really means the conveyance of the land itself subject to an irredeemable heritable right in security on the part of the superior to receive the feu duty and to have the other prestations, as they are called, implemented.
In essence, that means that the owner of the land, the superior, as he is called in this particular Clause, grants or conveys the land to the vassal or feuar, as we call him in Scotland, not for a lump sum down, but for a perpetual annual payment which the superior is entitled to receive. It is, in fact, very much like taking, instead of the capital sum, an annual rate of interest upon the basis of the capital sum which the land is worth; and if you calculate upon a general 5 per cent. interest, you will see that the sale of feu duties which has taken place in Scotland has properly been based in normal times upon something like 20 years' purchase. Because of the higher security which they give, it has sometimes been 33 or 34 years' purchase, and even, an hon. Friend reminds me, 37½ years' purchase. At present it is about 16 or 18 years' purchase, but round about 20 years' purchase has been the normal rate at which these feu duties have been bought and sold.
That apparently was the idea in the head of the draftsman who drew up the Clauses of this Bill, because, if you look at the figures, you will see that a penny in the pound on £100 of capital value represents 8s. 4d., which is the tax which it is proposed to impose. On the other hand, if you take 5 per cent. as the average return upon £100 of capital, a twelfth of that sum of £5 is exactly the same amount, namely, 8s. 4d.; and what the designer of this Bill has worked out is that the proprietor of the land
who is paying a feu duty to his superior shall be entitled to get back from his superior a twelfth part of the feu duty, which means that the superior who has parted with the land in the way that I have described shall be liable in the end for the whole of the burden of this taxation. This system has followed in this Bill from what has been done, so far England is concerned, with regard to leases of over 50 years' duration; and where this Measure has gone wrong, so far as Scotland is concerned, is that it has confused our feuar with an English lessee, and the English lessor with the Scottish superior, and it is sought to put the same burdens upon both.
The draftsman has entirely failed to notice—I observe the hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) nodding his head vigorously, because this does not suit his argument, but he will find difficulty in disputing the facts that I have put forward and those that are to follow. The confusion has taken place from this fact, that a superior in Scotland is not at all like a ground landlord in England, and a feuar in Scotland is not at all in the position of a lessee in England. The crux of the difference, you will find, is this particular factor—although there are many other significant elements to be taken into consideration—that a ground landlord in England who has granted a lease for more than 50 years remains the landlord; he remains the proprietor of the property, and when the lease terminates, he resumes possession and not only takes possession of the land, but also takes possession in most cases of the buildings that have been put upon it.
The result that follows is the circumstance that used to be held to justify the increment taxation which was put forward by the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George). When leases fell in, the ground landlord resumed possession of the ground and put up the rents, which perhaps had been made larger because of the improvements made upon the ground, or because of the improvements which the community had created round about it, and the ground landlord in that way received, or was thought by many people to be acquiring, an undue advantage, because, after his long leases came to an end, he was in a position to
resume possession and get the advantage of all the increment in the value of the land.
Now the superior in Scotland is not in that position at all. The feu is a perpetual grant, and the superior would be a trespasser if he walked on to the land. All that he is entitled to do with regard to it is, in the event of the feuar failing to conform to his obligation to pay the feu duty and keep proper buildings on the ground, to bring what is called an action of irritancy of the feu. During all the time the feuar is in possession, the feuar is the proprietor of the ground in all essentials, and the superior has absolutely no interest in it except that of having a security for a payment which has been contracted to be made to him, to his heirs, his assignees, and successors in perpetuity. Never at any time can he come upon the land again or have any rights whatsoever in it except in the case, as I say, of the feuar defaulting.
It is obvious that any increase in the value of the land matters nothing at all to him. He can never get any advantage out of it. He is indeed a person in possession of an irredeemable heritable right in security for the payment of the feu duty which has been contracted to be paid to him by the person who at any time is the proprietor of these lands. Is it not obvious that the conception upon which this Bill proceeds is entirely erroneous? Why did the hon. Member for Burslem shake his head when I said that the draftsman had got off on the lines of the English long lease, instead of acquiring some idea of what the Scottish system of feuing really was? That circumstance is proved by what takes place in the English Clauses themselves. There is a person in England who is in a somewhat analagous, or, rather, in a very similar situation to the Scottish superior. In England, he is a man who is in possession of a perpetual rent charge, which is in effect precisely the same thing that a superior has in respect of his perpetual feu duty. In the English Clauses of this Bill—and I am surprised that the learned Lord Advocate did not stand up for his own countrymen in this matter—the possessor of the perpetual rent charge is entirely excluded from its provisions and is never brought in at all.

The LORD ADVOCATE: Is the right Hon. Gentleman going to suggest to the Committee that a superior in a feu in Scotland is merely a creditor?

Sir R. HORNE: I am certainly going to say that a superior in Scotland has no other right than that of an irredeemable heritable right in security. That is all that he has. He has no property in the land. He has what is called a separate estate, and, if the Lord Advocate will think back to the definitions with which we are concerned——

The LORD ADVOCATE: As this is really of prime importance, is it the view of the right hon. Gentleman that a superior is only a heritable creditor?

Sir R. HORNE: I am not going to accept the rather loose language of the Lord Advocate, which has distinguished him, not only to-day, but in his drafting of this Bill. I am not going to take his loose and ill-defined language. If he cannot tell us the meaning of one of the important words in his own Bill, I do not think he can claim from me any right to have a reply upon language which he gives to me, and I do not feel obliged to answer him in his terms at all. I say this, that the superior in a feu in Scotland is much more analogous to a mortgagee in England than he is to a ground landlord or a lessor.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I will not interrupt again, but a mortgagee is a term of the law of England, and a heritable creditor is a recognised term of the law of Scotland. I am surprised that the right hon. Gentleman is not familiar with it, and I venture to put the question again—it is a plain question—Is the right hon. Gentleman going to tell a Committee of this House that a superior is a heritable creditor in the law of Scotland?

Sir R. HORNE: I do say that the superior is a heritable creditor in possession of an irredeemable heritable right in security. It was because I was going to deal with the position of the mortgagee in England that I made the analogy that I have suggested, and I say without fear of contradiction from anybody who knows that the position of the superior in Scotland is much more analogous to that of the mortgagee in England. I use the analogy of the mortgagee in England for the reason that
he is one of the people who is favoured and who is exempted from the provisions of this Bill. I should be very much interested to hear from the right hon. and learned Gentleman whether he does not think that the man in possession of a perpetual rentcharge is not in the same position as the superior is in regard to a feu in Scotland. We shall no doubt bear from him that meticulous analysis of legal definitions which we have been led to expect from him. We ask what rights has the mortgagee in England that a heritable creditor should not have in Scotland?

The LORD ADVOCATE: It is regrettable that the right hon. Gentleman did not refresh his memory before he came into the Committee.

Sir R. HORNE: My memory is quite good. My judgment is perhaps even better. I do not say better than the Lord Advocate's judgment, but better than my memory. I am willing that all these matters of analogy with the law of Scotland should be put before people whose judgment is competent in these questions, and that the conveyancers of Scotland, for example, should be asked to give their opinion. I have had the opportunity of reading in the last few days the opinions of some of the most expert conveyancers in Scotland, and they are unanimous in stating the same view which I have stated to the Committee.

The LORD ADVOCATE: indicated dissent.

Sir R. HORNE: If the Lord Advocate shakes his head, I shall ask him to do this. I shall ask him to find any statement of any eminent conveyancer in Scotland in recent papers which have been written disputing what I have said to the Committee. I shall wait with great expectation to hear what he has to say on the matter. I say with great deference, after the extent of the opinion I have seen on this matter from the most experienced conveyancers in Scotland in recent times, that the mere ipse dixit of the Lord Advocate will not convince me. What the Committee has to realise is that in fact the superior in Scotland is not at all in the position of a ground landlord or of a lessor in England, and that the two conditions must not be confused.
Let me give an indication how completely apart these two conditions fall. The feu duty in Scotland has been so much regarded as a separate matter that it is a subject of common sale in markets in Scotland. You see them advertised in the newspapers, and people who are in possession of them exist not only all over Scotland, but in various other parts of the world, because these duties are regarded as one of the best securities that anyone can hold for the investment of his money. A large variety of people have purchased these feu duties, and in that way have become superiors in the terms of the Clause in this Bill. There are people, like the Church of Scotland, who own something like £2,000,000 worth of feu duties. There are people, like the great educational trusts, the George Herriot Trust and others, whose investments are almost entirely in Scotch feu duties. A great many other people who have had to invest trust money have put their investments in Scotch feu duties, because by the law these duties have been recognised as a trust investment. Here again we have a distinction between the English case and the Scottish case, for ground rents in England are excluded from trust investments.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer has thought fit to exempt all those great public bodies which are embraced in the category of charitable institutions, churches, hospitals, educational organisations, universities, and so on. He has thought fit to leave them out, and then he has also added, for a reason best known to himself, the friendly societies. I think these are all perfectly proper upon principle, because the superior should be entirely outside the legislation which is embraced in this Bill. Coming to a question, not of principle, but of fairness, upon what ground are you going to exempt friendly societies who hold these feu duties as an investment, and at the same lime compel trustees, who are encouraged by the law to invest in feu duties, to pay taxation upon a subject which they thought would always be free of taxation? What the law will do, if this Bill succeeds, will be to encourage trustees instead of putting their money into sound investments to put it into investments which Parliament is going to deplete, and so to rob the beneficiaries. That is not the principle on which our legislation should be based.
Once you bring in the bodies of trustees who have made these investments, what about all the other people who have looked to these feu duties as the safest security they can have? I venture to suggest that both on grounds of principle and fairness the legislation which is contained in this Bill is entirely unworthy of Parliament.
I should like to turn to the case of the feuar. It is perfectly obvious, as it seems be me, that as soon as you begin to con-Hitler this Scottish system, you have a principle enunciated in this Bill which is entirely erroneous. In fact, the logic of our Scottish land system is the acid best of the theories upon which the Government are working. It is an acid which, when it comes into contact with the chemical compound which they have been creating, sends it up into a blue smoke. What about the position of the feuar? I have here a document from the building societies of Scotland. They are to be treated as neither dukes nor pariahs. There are 60,000 of these people who are members of building societies, and they say that this Bill, if it is put into operation, will be the destruction of the feu system on which the whole of their organisation has been built up.
Consider the anomaly you are going to crate. I ask you to think of the position of a feuar whose superior is a private individual. When the tax is imposed upon him he pays it, and then asks the superior for one-twelfth of the feu duty, and in the majority of cases, as I have pointed out, that would mean the whole of the tax. If it is the whole of the tax the feuar is lucky enough to escape entirely from the impost, and puts the burden upon the superior. But the superior sells to, let us say, George Herriot's Trust, or the Church of Scotland, or any of the other favoured people who are exempt, then the position of the feuar is immediately altered. The exempted person pays nothing, and the feuar had to pay it all. How can you justify a system which has these extraordinary results through no action on the part of the person holding the land? One day he is in a position in which he can claim against his superior for the amount he has had to pay, and the next day, by reason of the fact that the superior has chosen to sell his investments, he is compelled to find the whole
of the tax. This is too fantastic a proposal to be considered by a reasonable legislative assembly. This process is going on all the time, and the feuar will never know where he is. This is sufficient to exhibit the folly of this kind of legislation, and to show that the principle upon which the Government have gone is the wrong one.
Everyone agrees that it would be both feasible and reasonable to take some part of the increment in the value of the land which has grown in value owing to the action of the community. A proper contribution from the owner of land is, in those circumstances, perfectly justifiable and reasonable; but to attempt to put the tax on the mere ownership of land, as is attempted here, and to fail to distinguish between the feuar and the superior and their respective rights, so as to put the feuar in the ridiculous position of one day being subject to the tax and the next day not, is to reduce the whole of this legislation——

Mr. FRANK LEE: I am rather interested in this point. I was under the impression that if the land changes hands and come into the possession of one of the charities which are exempt it will not be chargeable to the tax.

Sir R. HORNE: The land would be chargeable, but the superior is exempt. If the land comes into the possession of one of these categories of people who are exempt the whole burden goes on to the feuer. Transactions of that character are going on day by day, and within a short period a feuar may first find that he is liable to pay the money, then that he is not liable, and, again, that his liability returns—all according to the caprice of the various people who are buying and selling the feu duties. Feu duties are bought and sold as Consols or Local Loans or any other investments are in this country, and the holders of them may change from day to day. There are people in Aberdeen holding feu duties in Kirkcudbright. The position of the land does not matter. The buyer recognises that it is a security which entitles him to draw a certain revenue every year, and if the money is not forthcoming the land and the house upon which it is built become available to him for the purpose of exacting his money. No security can be better than that, and the system has
grown up and has spread, and if Parliament passes this Bill it will strike a blow at one of the finest systems of land development and investment security which we have in this country.
I remember Lord Shaw of Dunfermline saying that the Scottish feuing system was the envy of the legal people of the world, and so it is. It has encouraged building as no other system ever has, and upon fairer methods. The man who wants to build does not have to find capital for the land at the time. He has only to pay an annual sum. If he had to find the money for the land he would have to pay more for it, because no reliable investor will advance more than two-thirds of the value of the security, but under the Scotch feu system the feuar is able to keep the money for building purposes, paying for the land only such amount as the landowners of Scotland have exacted, and generally it has been a very modest sum. It is upon that system that the great cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow have been built up, but what is going to happen if this Bill passes? I ask hon. Gentlemen opposite to consider what they would do if they were the owners of land in these circumstances. They would say, "If I feu this land to you I shall be liable to pay the tax. I will not do that any more, I want cash for my land, because in that case I shall have no burdens to pay." It is perfectly obvious that this legislation will be highly detrimental to the welfare of our country, and will break down a system which has been one of the glories of Scotland.
Though I have very much more to say I will only add this. I see here one Member of the Liberal party from Scotland, and I hope to get sympathy from him for the propositions I have put forward. [Interruption.] I know it is easier to get sympathy from the Liberals than to get their support. I do not know whether I have been able to master the full details of the Amendment which has been put down by the Liberal party, but if it indicates anything it seems to say that they are eager really to convert this taxation into what they previously supported. They propose that if the proprietor has already paid Income Tax under Schedule A he shall be entitled to deduct from the land value, as assessed
by the valuers, four times the amount of the rateable value, and I gather that that would cover the whole of the value of the land; but having started off upon that high principle they have been deflected somewhat, and have put in the vulgar fraction of ⅛d. as still to be imposed upon the value of the land. But I am not going to discuss that point now. All I venture to say is that they would get at the object of their Amendment much more easily if they would support us in rejecting the application of this Bill to the feuing system of Scotland. The hon. Member on the Liberal benches knows very well the advantages which that system has brought to Scotland, and I think the liberal party should join with us in saving for Scotland a system of conveyancing which has been of the greatest possible advantage to our people.

Mr. MacLAREN: We have listened to a long speech from the right hon. Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Home). It was interesting, and I hope he will not mind my saying that the opening part of it was very instructive to those Members who are not Scotsmen and who wonder what these feu duties are. The latter part of his speech, however, was special pleading. It was not a case of establishing a reason why the feu should be exempt from the tax, but, rather, an attempt to get the sympathy of the House, showing how much has been done through these feus and what money has been secured through them for charitable purposes, and what a dastardly thing it is that any Government should be so irreligious or sacriligeous as to put a tax on feus. That is special pleading. The right hon. and learned Gentleman indicated that after all the feu is simply interest on the capital value and that the landlord is sacrificing something. Instead of realising the capital value at once the landlord is prepared to take a fixed amount in the form of feus. This Bill proposes to put a tax on the value of the land, and the question arises if there happens to be more than one interest in the land as to who should pay the tax and in what proportion. If it can be shown that a superior has no right of entry on the land if the feuar failed in his payments; if that can be proved, then there would be much substance in the argument of the right hon. Gentle-
man but he knows that the feuar can enter on the land, and in fact has a first claim upon the land.

Sir R. HORNE: I said that quite distinctly, and that is the only condition upon which he can resume the land.

Mr. MacLAREN: With regard to the difference between a mortgagee and the superior's relation to the feuar, on that matter I would like to say a word or two, but I cannot see any relation between the mortgagee and the superior. I have here a quotation on this point from Professor Bell:
The feu-duty forms a charge also on the lands. The payment of it is one of the conditions of the grant. And, the superior having a real legal estate in the lands, having in fact the right to the lands, and to eject the vassal if he does not fulfil the condition by paying the feu duty, the feu duty is a real and preferable burden on the lands—a debitum fundi. It is part of the reserved estate in which the superior stands infelt; and the superior's claim for payment of the feu-duty is ranked as a burden on the feu, in preference to the claim of any third party upon the feu made through the vassal. The lands as given out to the vassal and held by him, are subject to the burden; and he cannot give any right to the lands otherwise than subject to the same burden. The superior's right to the feu duty is preferable to the vassal's right to the lands.

Sir R. HORNE: That is not different from what I have already stated.

Mr. MacLAREN: There is a certain amount of logical force in that case, because there was a Lord Advocate for Scotland, Lord Strathclyde, who had to battle with this question on the Floor of the House when the Act of 1910 was before Parliament. He said at the Queen's Hall, Edinburgh, on the 1st of March, 1907:
I am told with an air of triumph that feu duty is not rent. What is it? Interest on a debt, I am told. I wish it was. I would pay up my debt to-morrow, and stop all further payments of feu duty. What is the amount of the debt on which my feu duty is said to be interest? No man knows. The debt is recorded nowhere.

Sir R. HORNE: The amount is what would be the assumed value of the land at the time when the feu duty was created.

Mr. MacLAREN: Then the capital value would therefore be depreciated, would it not?

Sir R. HORNE: You would borrow money from the bank.

Mr. MacLAREN: What is the amount of the duty on which the feu duty would be payable? Apparently the right hon. Gentleman opposite seems to know, but I do not think there is any authority for the statement which the right hon. Gentleman has made. We have been told that it is the interest charge, but here is the opinion of Lord Strathclyde on that point:
Here is a debt then of a description so extraordinary, that no human being can find out its amount. How can a creditor enforce or a debtor be compelled to pay a debt which neither of them knows the amount of?

Sir R. HORNE: It is very easy to reply to this, but I do not want to take up time.

Mr. MacLAREN: As a matter of fact, on the right hon. Gentleman's own showing, the feu duty has no relation to the capital value of the land. Apparently his reply, in trying to meet this statement, is that the feu is really interest on a deferred payment of the capital value of the land. The main argument of hon. Members opposite is that it is interest on a debt, but in the next breath they say that the superior is only getting a definite sum which has no reference whatever to the rising value of the land.

Mr. BOOTHBY: Obviously it has reference to the capital value of the land at the time when the feu duty was created.

Mr. MacLAREN: If the hon. Member were as brilliant on this subject as he is on the subject of gold and the monetary system, he might perhaps have contributed something to the discussion, but his interjection is quite irrelevant. If he knows anything about the matter at all, he knows that in many instances the feu bears no relation whatever to the capital value. Let me come to another point. We were told by the right hon. and learned Member for Hill-head that the feu duty is an irredeemable heritable right and security——

Sir R. HORNE: That is what it is.

Mr. MacLAREN: —which neither rises nor falls in value in relation to
the land itself. Then we were told that, being an irredeemable heritable right and security, it is like a perpetual rent-charge in England.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: It is like the number of the elect; it can neither be added to nor taken away from.

Mr. MacLAREN: I can see that if the hon. and learned Member for Argyll (Mr. Macquisten) had been handling this matter he would have handled it much more subtly. The analogy is with the English perpetual rentcharge. I would have no compunction at all in making the perpetual rentcharge in England pay its tribute, and I do not see why it should have been exempted.

Sir R. HORNE: It is exempted.

Mr. MacLAREN: I know it is; I am merely saying that if I had anything to do with it the similarity would certainly have come out in the tribute to be paid under the Bill. This similarity, both in fact and in practice, points to the feeling at the back of the mind of the right hon. and learned Member for Hillhead that there is something in this similarity between the perpetual rentcharge and the owner of a feu duty. The tax is to be levied under this Bill, and the question arises, must the feuar bear the whole of the tax, or must someone else, who has a superior claim over the land, namely, the owner of the feu, be called upon to pay his contribution towards the tax? If the principle be conceded that the tax on land value is to be levied, there is no argument that can be advanced to prove that the superior should not pay his contribution in respect of the element of land value that enters into the feu duty. This Bill is taking means to call upon the superior to forgo one-twelfth of his feu duty. We are told that in certain circumstances this will mean great distress to the feuar, because we are told that the feuar may discover that in the meantime the superior has sold the feu to the Heriot Trust, and the Heriot Trust and other charitable educational institutions will enjoy exemption under the Bill. That is so. These are little anomalies which I am afraid——

Sir R. HORNE: They are very extensive.

Mr. MacLAREN: I know. These are anomalies which I quite appreciate, and which I would never have allowed to get into a Bill. If I had been handling this Measure, I would call upon the Heriot Trust and all these wealthy corporations to pay their tribute. But there it is. These are the little difficulties that arise under the accommodations which have to be made to charitable institutions in a Bill of this kind. I am sure that the right hon. and learned Member for Hill-head would not ask me to try to work noon, night and morn to have a Cause inserted in the Bill making the Heriot Trust stand in along with the superiors, so that the feuar could get some meed of justice out of the new exemptions. That, however, to be quite honest, is one of the adjustments that really cannot be made on equal terms with the issue between us now. We have to accept it, and there it is.
If I may recapitulate what I have said, the superior has a claim on the land over the vassal, and if the vassal fails in his duty the superior can enter on the land and realise. That shows that he has an unending control over the land, and therefore, where you tax the value of the land, you are really calling upon the superior, with his apparently superior relationship and claim over the soil, to pay part of his tribute towards the tax. When it comes to appealing on purely emotional grounds as to the way in which these feus have been bought and sold, and how the Scottish Church, ecclesiastical establishments, and charitable institutions have bought and sold these feus, I, for one, am never overcome by such appeals. It always reminds me of the fact that, when Lloyd Garrison was fighting for the emancipation of the slaves in America, some of the most ardent enemies of his campaign were to be found in the ranks of the Churches. They said, "Do not abolish this trade, because we have invested our money in it, and are using it for charitable and educational purposes."
We create a system which necessitates this charity. We create a system, and perpetuate it day by day, which necessitates this system of one man looking after the needs of another on a charitable basis. These institutions are maintained by immoral gambling in the value of the land of the country, and we are asked to-night, on emotional grounds, not to touch the
Ark of the Covenant, the ownership of land, because the money that comes out of it is used for charitable purposes. Such is the irony that one can deduce from the situation which arises from this discussion. We must not touch this wrong of the appropriation of the value of land, because in many instances it is used for charitable purposes. I am afraid, Mr. Chairman, that I am getting dangerously near your Ruling, but it is necessary to remind the House of these matters when we are asked not to touch feu duties because ecclesiastical establishments and charitable institutions have invested in them—because they have put themselves into the right of superiors, because they have put themselves in the position to enter in upon vassals who do not fulfil their side of the bargain.

Sir D. HERBERT: The hon. Member stopped short just now after saying that there was no analogy between the feu system and the English rentcharge. Would he tell us what the difference is between the two?

Mr. MacLAREN: I said that the right hon. and learned Member for Hillhead said that there was a similarity.

Sir D. HERBERT: I think I under-stood the hon. Member to say that there was not, but he did not tell us why there was not a similarity.

Mr. MacLAREN: I understand that in England a person whose land is subject to a rentcharge can redeem it and become the freeholder, but in the case of a feu that is not possible—it is continuous; it is quite distinct; you cannot redeem a feu; it is perpetual.

Sir D. HERBERT: You can by agreement.

Mr. MacLAREN: My point was that whatever similarity there seemed to be could only be the similarity that both of them were drawing tribute out of the land, and I say that you want broad, comprehensive treatment of both. I would have no compunction in calling upon owners of rentcharges to pay their tribute as well as owners of feus. If there is more than one party interested in a piece of land, what is fairer than to call upon each to contribute to the tax in proportion to the amount that he is enjoying out of the site value?

Sir D. HERBERT: The hon. Member is wrong on this one point. The person who pays a perpetual rentcharge in England has no more right to redeem it and pay it off than the vassal under the feuing system. It can be done by agreement between the parties, but that is all.

Mr. MacLAREN: There is no opportunity under a feuing agreement for redemption.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: I have seen it done scores of times.

Mr. MacLAREN: Redemption can be carried out by private agreement with regard to a rentcharge, but it is not a common practice with regard to feus as far as I know. In any case, this does not vitiate the point I am trying to make. What is fairer than that, if you are going to impose a tax, they shall contribute in proportion to the amount that they enjoy? That is the sum total of the case I am making. But let it be remembered that all this talk about how much is being done by these interested parties for charity weighs but little in the balance. We want a just institution of the tax, and that we are determined to have.

Mr. BUCHAN: I should like to say a few words on the Amendment moved by my right hon. Friend the Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne). If to some extent I traverse the same ground, it is because I believe his arguments cannot be repeated too often or too forcibly. The hon. Member who has just spoken is always heard with great respect, for he holds certain strong views with conviction and earnestness. When he got up, I hoped that at last we were going to hear a layman's view on this question, but he spent most of his time in arguing, whether correctly or incorrectly I will not say, on points of law. I want to put the layman's point of view, because I believe that behind this Clause there is a very substantial and important question of policy. I am not competent to argue on the definition of Scottish law terms. My knowledge of Scots law is purely historical, and I would not dare to dispute with the Lord Advocate on a matter like that, but I am prepared to argue on the substance of the policy.
My first objection to this Clause is that it puts Scotland in a very inferior position as compared with England. Scotland is treated far more harshly than the sister country. I do not think the
Lord Advocate is, as my hon. and gallant Friend said earlier in the evening, like the dog that you find running behind a cart. He seems to me much more like the ranging dog that rune on ahead, because I think this Clause, for which no doubt he is largely responsible, goes far beyond anything in the rest of the Bill that applies to England. We have already had a very clear definition of our feuing system. The superior under our feuing system is not in any sense an owner or proprietor, and he has no real right of property in the land. You can test that in many ways. The Scottish Trust Acts from 1884 onwards give permission to invest in feus, but not in land. There is a very well known Scottish case where it was held that trustees, who would invest in land, were not empowered to invest in feus. In Scottish law a widow is entitled to a share of her husband s rents but not of his feu duties.
9.0 p.m.
Lands and feus have always been clearly distinguished in Scottish law. A superior is simply in the position of an English mortgagee. He is perpetually excluded from any share in 9.0 p.m. the management and use of the land. If he enters upon it, he is a trespasser unless he goes for a particular purpose. He has no share in any increment value. He is simply in the position of a mortgagee who has a right of entry for foreclosure in case of non-payment. Under Clause 16 of this Bill, in England a mortgagee is exempt from taxation unless he is actually in receipt of the rents or has entered upon the land. That is one exception in favour of England. Moreover, in England you have a system of tenure called the chief rent, which is very well known in the North and which is indistinguishable in substance and practice from the Scottish feu. You have a system which is very common in Lancashire called the fee farm rent, which is indistinguishable from the Scottish feu. You have in Scotland a system of ground annuals, which is indistinguishable in substance and practice from the feu. Ground annuals, I understand, are to be included in this Measure, but fee farm and chief rents are excluded, and mortgages are excluded. I entirely fail to see why the superior of a Scottish feu should be liable to this form of taxation, when what is
exactly the economic and practical English equivalent is exempt. That is my first objection to the Clause.
It may be said—and I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) will say it—that since it is a tax, not on increment but on capital value, the fact of the superior having no interest in what is called the equity of the land, that is any increase in value which may come to it from the action of the community or otherwise, that that fact is entirely irrelevant. But if the Government are immune to appeals on the grounds of justice, I will ask them at least to consider the grave practical consequences of Clause 30. A comparatively small number of the feu duties are in the hands to-day of the superiors who created them. As my right hon. Friend told us, they are sold as freely as debentures. They are held by all kinds of charitable and educational bodies, and under the Act of 1884 the Church of Scotland was compelled to invest something like £2,000,000 in them on the ground that they were the safest, simplest, most certain, and the least fluctuating kind of investment.
Bodies of that type, I understand, are to be taken out of the Act, But these feu duties are also held by an enormous number of trustees and by insurance companies on precisely the same ground. The question I want to ask is this: Even if these land taxes are right on the ground of public policy, on the ground that somehow or other they are going to cheapen and facilitate the sale of land, how are you going to effect this by penalising feus, a form of security which has no longer any direct relation to the land and whose relation to the land is now purely an historical thing? There would be a great outcry if any Government introduced a special tax on trustee stocks as opposed to other stocks. But that is precisely what you are doing in this case. You are specially penalising a favourite form of trustee security as compared with other trustee securities, in spite of the fact, as I have tried to argue, that this particular taxation can in no way help forward the general purposes of the levy.
I submit that the only reasonable course is to take feu duties out of the Act altogether; to cut the feuar and superior alike out of the Act. I would point out to hon. Members opposite that
if that is not done, one disastrous result must follow. You will jeopardise the whole national system of feuing which has worked uncommonly well in the past. I do not think that anyone can seriously deny that that system has in the past worked well. It has been a great help in the development of Scottish land. If a man wanted to develop a building estate with a limited capital, he was not asked to pay a large sum in cash for site value. All that he paid was a modest annuity, and he had his money to spend in development. Money which would otherwise have gone into payments to the landlord went to bricks and mortar. Do the Government desire to strike at a system so obviously beneficent as that?
In some cases to-day you have feu duties microscopic in size as compared to the enormous rental value of the property. There is the famous North side of Princes Street where, I think 150 years ago, the Corporation of Edinburgh for development purposes feued a large area. The total of the feu duties is to-day £250 a year, but I understand that the rental of that area is something like £180,000. In a case like that I agree that there is no comparison with what the feuars and the superiors pay. But you have cases to-day where the superior may pay the whole of the tax. For example, take the suburbs of Glasgow or Edinburgh. Let me give you an illustration which has been given by the Edinburgh Town Council. Take a villa in an Edinburgh suburb of which the rent would be something like £85. The feu duties would be about £7 4s., taking the normal feu for that class of house. The land value of the site would work out at something like £144. The taxation would be 12s. on the Government scheme. One-twelfth of £7 4s., the feu duty, is 12s., so in that case under this Measure the superior would have to pay the whole of the Land Tax. What landowner with that kind of fate in store for him is going to feu land any more? He will demand a cash sum. He is doing it to-day through fear of this Bill—I have heard of many cases. He is going to demand a sale for hard cash, with the result that it will be far harder to develop a building estate, because the unfortunate developer will have to pay a large capital sum for the land, and will have very little money to spend upon its development. Can the
Government seriously desire to bring about a state of affairs like that?
It is an old legal adage that hard cases make bad law, and that is good sense. If you attempt to make a general rule to cover every possible exception, it will break down. But this is a Bill where all the cases are hard. It is made up of nothing but hard cases. It is a bed with nothing but spikes in it. I have three objections to this Clause which I would commend most seriously to the consideration of my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Advocate. My first difficulty is that the taxation of feu duties at all lays a burden upon a form of tenure in Scotland, while forms which are identical or substantially identical in England escape altogether. As a Scotsman, I object to that differentiation.
My second difficulty is that this Clause lays a burden upon one particular kind of trustee security as opposed to others, in spite of the fact that this burden in no way assists what I understand are the general, and, in the view of many hon. Members, the beneficent purposes of His Majesty's Government in imposing this levy, to cheapen and facilitate the sale of land. My third difficulty is that the economic effect will be to cripple most gravely the easy and the natural adaptation of Scottish land to the needs and the uses of the Scottish people.

Mr. BARR: I think it will be agreed that this part of the Clause, and the Amendment, touch a very vital point and one of far-reaching consequences. The point made by the right hon. Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Home), and by the hon. Gentleman the Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. Buchan), is, first of all, that in the initiation of a feu duty there is on the part of the superior a sale, in the main outright, of the property. I think that the words used by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hillhead were that he parted with his land, and the words used by the hon. Gentleman who has just resumed his seat were that he had no longer any real property in the land. The theory is that the superior really advances the money to purchase, and that he repays himself by a feu duty, which those who take the point of view of the Amendment regard as interest on the money advanced. The right hon. Member for Hillhead spoke of
it as an annual rate of interest. Therefore, the superior becomes a kind of creditor, a mere heritable creditor. Although I ought not to say it in his absence, the right hon. Member for Hill-head, when the point was definitely put to him whether he would use the word "creditor," rather hedged on the subject; yet those who maintain the point of view of the Amendment in their documents, many of which we have received, do not scruple to use the word. They say that he is a mere creditor and not an owner. That is the point of view taken by many in regard to feu duties. The secretary of the committee of charitable, religious and educational bodies in Scotland has sent us a memorandum in which he says:
The feuar of a plot of ground so long as he continues to pay the covenanted feu duty, is as fully the absolute owner of the ground as an out-and-out purchaser who has paid down the price.
As opposed to that view we say that when the superior enters into this arrangement he does not divest himself of the lands contained in the grant. I should like to mention several of the rights that remain to him. His heir is entitled to be vested not in the superiority only but in the lands themselves. It has been said by both the speakers on the other side that he becomes a trespasser if he goes on the land, but he has the right to challenge any encroachment on the feu. The right hon. Member for Hillhead said that it was only in the case of non-payment of the covenanted feu-duty that the lands could be resumed. Surely, that is a very large condition. As a matter of fact he can not only eject the feuar from his claim to the land, but his right to the feu duty is superior to the vassal's right to the land.
Therefore, we contend that fundamentally and radically the right to the land remains in the hands of the superior. I will give an illustration from my own experience. I was for 11 years a member of the School Board of Glasgow. I asked them the other day if they could give me particulars of their sites whether bought outright or by the feuing process up to date. They were unable to do so. Therefore I content myself with the figures as they stood 20 years ago. For the sites of 73 schools the School
Board of Glasgow paid £468,659, and in most of those cases they had also running feu duties to the extent in all of £1,882 per annum. I mention that in order to show how vast are the operations connected with the securing of sites, and to combat what fell from the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities where he spoke as if this feuing had no relation to the acquiring of land. I mention it mainly to show that there is a real distinction, and everyone in administration knows it, between purchase outright and acquiring through feu duties. The right hon. Member for Hillhead and the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities complain that Scotland is being subjected to some injustice. They took up the position that the owner of the feu duties, whether the original granter of the feu-charter, or purchaser of the right to the feu-duties, was in the position of a mortgagee. That view has been put forward in many circulars that we have received. For example, the memorandum which we have received from the Church of Scotland says that you might as well put a tax on all mortgages or heritable securities affecting land and call it a land values tax.
I wish to point out the difference between a feu duty and a mortgage. Subject to various restrictions as to time and place, the Bent Restrictions Act and the like, the lender of a mortgage is entitled to call up the loan when he requires it. Those who have a feu contract, the feuar, has a perpetual tenure at a perpetual feu duty and his contract does not contain any reference to a loan or to any power to call it up.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: In the definition which the hon. Member has given of a mortgage does it not show that the mortgagee if he wishes can call up the whole of the money, whereas the other can get only his dole for the year; and is not the mortgagee the better off of the two and so should pay the tax?

Mr. BARR: I will show the other side of it. The man who calls up the mortgage can only call up what is due to him with his expenses, but in the other case the owner of the feu irritates the feu, cancels the whole feu and enters and extinguishes the rights of the vassal. A good deal has been said about the feu as a trust investment. In the contention of the party opposite, and many of those
who have approached us take the same view, these are trust securities and this legislation is a violation of existing contracts. The memorial of the Church of Scotland describes the proposals in regard to feu duties by saying:
It is a direct violation of the sanctity of contract and is to all intents and purposes a form of expropriation of private property.
You might say that of all taxation. The argument is that there has been a contract and a stipulation under which a fixed sum without any diminution will be paid year by year, and that if that sum is not paid in full we violate the contract. It is argued that it is immoral and unjust to put on any burden seeing that there is such a contract. It has been proved time and again under the law of Scotland that a contract like that relates only to existing public burdens. If a superior has stipulated that he is to be relieved of all public burdens, the public burdens from which he is to be relieved can only be those existing at the time and not new burdens that may be imposed by a tax like this. I want to confirm that because it is most important. In the case of Scott v. Edmond in 1850 Lord Robertson said, and the other Judges concurred in it:
It is undoubted law that an ordinary contract of warrandice docs not cover burdens imposed by statutes subsequent to the date of the grant.
In the interlocutor they declared that the Clause of relief
imposts relief only from burdens imposed, or to be imposed, on the lands in question, by virtue of laws then in existence—and that the defender, his heirs and successors, an; not entitled to relief from any other assessments or taxes.
The very same principle is embodied in a ruling given in 1878 in what was known as the Dunbar's Trustees case which was carried to the House of Lords. The Lord Chancellor, Lord Cairns, quoted with approval what Lord Ormisdale said in the early stages of the case in the Court of Session:
It cannot, I think, now be questioned, at least in this court, that while such an obligation as that in question will give relief from all public burdens exigible or payable at its date, or that may thereafter at any time be exigible or payable by virtue of any law of or practice existing at its date, it will not afford relief from public burdens created or imposed for the first time by supervenient laws, that is to say, by laws enacted after the date of the obligation.
I could give many other illustrations to the same effect.

Mr. SKELTON: Why waste time by repeating it?

Mr. BARR: I am not repeating it, but am explaining to the hon. Member a very pertinent point. Therefore, apart from that, we need not emphasise that Parliament can determine as to the imposition of new laws. There have been the Irish Land Acts, and the Scottish Small Landholders Acts.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: And the Union of the Churches.

Mr. BARR: I do not think that is a very relevant remark. Personally, I am not ashamed of any public action that I have taken. There seems to be a very sore mood on the other side. To begin with, we had the display of temper by the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvin-grove (Major Elliot). Then the intervention of the former Minister of of Labour; and now this rather sinister interjection against myself, all showing that we have them on the run. They are showing themselves rattled this evening when they resort to personalities.
Now I come to my third point, which is just as important as the other two I have made. We were told that these were bought and sold, that people have been advised and almost compelled to purchase these feu duties. Charitable trusts and public bodies have held them as an investment. If we are correct in holding, as I have been seeking to prove, that this is rent for land, there is no reason why the owners of the feu duties should be exempt any more than the owners of the full right of property in the land. It was hinted by the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. Buchan) that people even of slender means have invested in this way. Be it so. Are they to get no benefit at all from this Measure? That, I think, is continually being lost sight of.
It was intimated to us by the right hon. Member for Hillhead (Sir E. Home) that the building societies regarded this as the destruction of building societies in Scotland. They can know little of the operation of land taxes in any part of the world. It was indeed argued that it would jeopardise the whole system of feuing in the country. I am well convinced that when this Measure has been
some time in operation and there are fewer restrictions upon it, they will be very glad to have the feu duties, even if they have to pay the tax. We were told by the right hon. Member for Hill-head that it was one of the very best securities in Scotland and that Parliament was going to deplete it. Why is it one of the best securities? It is because the maintenance of the security depends on the presence and expenditure of the community, and that those who benefit from that expenditure should contribute to it.
One word more. I am confident that the Government will not yield at all to this Amendment. It was said here today that there had been no land tax in Scotland. I wonder where some hon. Members get their history. Why, in the time of Alexander III there was a land tax, and in the very first full Parliament ever held in Scotland, at Cambuskenneth in 1326, they imposed one-tenth of a penny on the land according to the old extent, that is according to the valuation made at the time of Alexander III. King Robert the Bruce, who was a convinced land taxer, said that for the purpose of this levy it would be well if all the landowners would produce their titles. We are told that every man put his hand on his sword, and said it was by that title be held his land. We have a more ancient title—a title as old as human right itself. The sword by which we defend our ancient title has been unsheathed. We have only a very small part of this right. We have only got our foot, as it were, on our native heath, and I beseech the Government not to draw that foot back, but to go forward and enable the people to come into the ownership and the control of what, after all, is their greatest material inheritance.

Mr. TRAIN: I am sure that all are deeply grateful, and especially we Scotsmen, to the hon. Member for Motherwell (Mr. Barr) for telling us something about Bruce and about having our foot on our native heath, but, as far as I can gather, he is going to support the Government in putting its foot on the neck of Scotland. He is content to boast and brag about the great warriors of Scotland, but he is going to take very calmly the fact that England is to be exempted and Scot-
land is to be asked to pay. It is quite common in Lancashire, and in the town which the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself represents, to have feu farms like our feus in Scotland. The hon. Member for Burslem (Mr. MacLaren) asked the right hon. Member for Hill-head (Sir R. Home) the amount of the debt on which the feu duty is said to be the interest. It is not the original feu duty which people, are paying to-day; it is part of the building scheme. It is quite customary in Scotland to feu land at £20 per acre, to put eight houses per acre upon it and to put £5 on each house. Therefore, when the scheme is finished you are paying at the rate of £40 per acre per annum.
It may be said that that is double the original feu. It is, it is putting another £20 on; but where does that £20 go? It is used for the making of the streets, developing the site and putting in the sewers. If, on the other hand, it was only £2 10s. feu duty on each house then an extra £80 would require to be charged for the house when it is sold. Builders do not live on air and they cannot live on their losses. They have to make a profit, and it is much easier in Scotland to put a little on the feu and then get a bond for as much as possible in order to enable people to acquire their own houses. There are many thousands of people in and around Glasgow who are glad to be the owner of their own houses, but they are only able to become so by the system we have been working in Scotland. I plead with the Lord Advocate, as a good Scotsman, to be as proud of his country as the hon. Member for Motherwell and not to let England get away with it. Give us in Scotland what is being given to England; put us out of this Bill as far as the feus are concerned. If not the effect will be—indeed, the building trade is already beginning to feel the weight of this Bill—a slackening in the industry, and in the demand for houses. They want to know whether there is to be a charge on the feu duty when they buy a house. I plead with the Lord Advocate, for the sake of those who want to acquire their own houses and for the sake of those engaged in the building trade, to delete feu duties entirely from the Bill. Why should the tax be the same on a feu of this kind,
when a man cannot recover at any time the possession of his land, as it is on a 99 years lease in England? Let us Scotsmen have some pride and not allow the Englishman to get the best end of the stick all the time. This is an ill-conceived and hurriedly drawn up Measure. There are many mistakes in it. I hope the Lord Advocate will accept the Amendment.

The LORD ADVOCATE: The hon. Member says that there are many mistakes in this Bill, but it is rather remarkable that not a single one of those mistakes has been pointed out this afternoon. We have had an exhibition of temper and immoderation on the part of hon. and right hon. Members opposite to which I do not intend to refer further, but the reason is quite easy to understand. This Bill cannot, as we anticipate, be touched in another place, and accordingly the representatives of that other place in this House have to take the opportunity of venting their spleen, and I congratulate them upon the way that they have done so.

Major COLVILLE: Answer the question.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I propose now to deal with the Amendment which has been moved by the right hon. Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Horne). I always pay the greatest respect to anything which the right hon. Gentleman says upon any question affecting the law of Scotland, but I must demur to what he has said as to the position of the superior in the land system of Scotland. I am not going to ask the right hon. Gentle-man to take my ipsi dixit on this matter, and I will give him my authority for what I say. I agree with one observation of the right hon. Gentleman that when yon are dealing with the application Clause in a Bill of this kind you cannot take, as you can in a great many cases, the Scottish equivalent of the English expression. One of the difficulties which we have had to face, and I shall submit that we have faced it successfully, is the difficulty of working out the principle of a tax in land systems which are fundamentally different. You cannot get and you do not get any precise correspondence between a leasehold in England and a feu in Scotland. So far, I agree with the view of the right hon. Gentleman. Analogies
sought to be drawn between leasehold and feu on the one hand, or between feu and rentcharge on the other hand are misleading analogies. That does not arise from any inconsistency in the principle of the tax or its application, but arises solely from the fact that you are dealing with systems of land tenure which are fundamentally different. I propose to explain to the Committee why we regard the proposals in this part of the Bill as just. The Committee are aware land tenure in Scotland is feudal tenure and the essence of feudal tenure is that the land is held by a vassal, under a superior, for payment of an annual feu duty. The feu duty is fixed in amount. Hon. Members opposite are right in saying that it is capable neither of increase nor of diminution. It is a payment in perpetuity and, in essence, it is rent for the laud, and nothing but rent for the land.

Sir R. HORNE: Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman quote any authority in Scotland, any institutional writer or any dictum from the bench, which says that this is rent for the land?

The LORD ADVOCATE: I am very glad indeed that the right hon. Gentleman has addressed that question to me, because in a moment I am going to quote authority for that proposition.

Sir R. HORNE: The authority of an institutional writer?

The LORD ADVOCATE: Yes, and I will give the reference. On the fringe of our system of feudal tenure in Scotland we have the long lease and, in Orkney and Shetland, we have a system of tenure which is called udal, but these, as I say, are merely on the fringe of the prevailing system of land tenure and I do not propose to go into them. In considering what ought to be the proper position of feu duty under the taxing provisions of the Bill, the Committee must start from this proposition—that by the law of Scotland a superior is not a creditor but is a landowner. The right hon. Gentleman's speech proceeded on the view that the superior was merely a creditor and that the measure of the superior's rights was the measure of the heritable creditor's rights.

Sir R. HORNE: I must correct the right hon. and learned Gentleman on that point. I was very careful to define what a superior was and the right hon.
and learned Gentleman will recall that the result of his question to me was that he did not inveigle me into his language. It was too loose to be accepted by an accurate lawyer. He says that I persisted in saying that the superior was merely a creditor but I said nothing of the kind. I said that he was the holder of an irredeemable heritable right in security for the payment of his feu duty. When I came to deal with the operation of his rights I said that his case was very much more like the analogy of a perpetual rent-charger in England, or a mortgagee. I have a communication here from the Scottish legal societies. I do not know whether the right hon. and learned Gentleman receives these communications or not, but, if he does, I hope he studies them. [Interruption.]

HON. MEMBERS: Do not be insulting.

Mr. SKELTON: Any statement of the law is insulting to hon. Members opposite.

Sir R. HORNE: I have here a communication from the general committee of the legal societies of Scotland which is a very representative body. They state in this communication that under the proposals contained in the Bill by which feu duties are for the first time to become subject to taxation other than Income Tax, the interest of the superior—and to this I wish to direct the right hon. and learned Gentleman's attention—is
practically that of a mortgagee, the feu duty being a perpetual annuity secured on land.
I am quite content in this matter to be ranked with the representatives of the legal societies of Scotland.

The LORD ADVOCATE: The Committee will observe that in the passage which the right hon. Gentleman has quoted from the document of the legal societies of Scotland—to which I shall refer in a moment—there was the saving-word "practically." In the course of the right hon. Gentleman's speech I rose more than once to ask him whether on his responsibility as a Scottish lawyer ho was going to tell the Committee that by the law of Scotland the superior was merely a creditor or a heritable creditor, and I am not in the least surprised that the right hon. Gentleman thought it the more discreet course to avoid giving any answer to that question.

Mr. SKELTON: Then why did you say that he did answer it?

The LORD ADVOCATE: The hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) says that the right hon. Gentleman gave an answer. I am quite willing that the matter should be judged by hon. Members to-morrow when we see the terms of the OFFICIAL REPORT. Various suggestions have been made as to what a feu is. This is a rather technical matter, but I shall put it quite shortly, if hon. Members will allow me to proceed. It has been said by hon. Members opposite that a feu is simply a sale. A feu is not a sale. That was the subject matter of a decision by the Court of Session over 100 years ago. That decision has never been challenged, and I am certain is not challenged by the right hon. Gentleman now. Many of the old charters or deeds relating to land in Scotland contained prohibitions against sale. The owners of those charters feued their land, and the Court of Session said that a feu was not a sale. Yet the right hon. Gentleman or some of his colleagues tried to represent to this Committee that a feu is simply a sale by the law of Scotland.
Another ingenious and perverted suggestion made was that a feu was simply a loan. That is a very old argument and admits of a very simple answer. In the case of a loan you can always get rid of the obligation to pay interest by repaying the debt. The interest depends upon the debt. But in Scotland you cannot get rid of paying the feu duty; you can get rid of the feu duty only if you get rid of the land. Accordingly, the analogy of the loan has entirely failed. On this question as to what is the true legal position of a superior I would remind the Committee that we are fortunate in having the report of a Select Committee of the House of Commons. That was a Committee which sat in the year 1906, presided over by a very distinguished predecessor in the office which I hold—Lord Advocate Ure, who was then Solicitor-General. This matter was most fully and carefully considered, and evidence was taken upon it, and we have the findings of the Committee. I am not asking the right hon. Member for Hillhead to accept my view, but perhaps he will be good enough to listen to what a Select Committee of the House of Commons said upon this matter. What the Committee said was this:
The exclusion of those who draw feu duties from the category of ratepayers, is maintained on various grounds. It is said that they are simply out and out sellers of the land who have lent the purchase price to the buyer and continue to draw interest upon it in the form of feu duty. They are thus mere creditors of the owner and are not themselves ownerss.
Then certain other things are said. I commend this to the attention of the right hon. Member for Hillhead.

Sir R. HORNE: I know that report very well.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I am very glad indeed that the right hon. Gentleman knows the report. Perhaps he is none the worse for being reminded of what the report says. He has flourished before me a report of the joint committee of the Legal Societies of Scotland of which I shall have more to say presently. Let me read to the right hon. Gentleman now what the Select Committee said:
Your Committee has given the most anxious consideration to the case thus presented for the exemption of superiors and owners of feu duties. It is impossible, in the opinion of your Committee, to accede to the claim.
Listen to this:
The legal relation between superior and vassal and their relative rights to the land are familiar and well ascertained in the law of Scotland. When a superior feus laud he is not truly divested of the land contained in the grant. Your Committee finds it impossible to accept the view that the superior is not an owner of land but is a more creditor of the owner with a security over the land.
It may be suggested that owing to the political controversies that raged in 1906, when that committee sat and reported, a partisan quality may be thought to attach to the findings in that report. 10.0 p.m. But I will quote to the right hon. Gentleman an authority for whom I know he will have great respect. I will quote him a sentence from Erskine's Institutes of the Law of Scotland. It is one of the great classical works on the law of Scotland. I will quote what Mr. Erskine wrote. Hon. Members may challenge what was said by the Select Committee, but I he would be a bold man who would challenge Mr. Erskine on this matter. My reference is to Book 2, Title 3, paragraph 1. I wish that the right hon. Member for Hillhead would give some notice to what Mr. Erskine said:
There is not in any feudal grant an absolute or total cession of the subjects disponed made by the granter.
Accordingly the proposition that a superior is merely in the position of a creditor is a proposition that is contradicted by authority. If it were necessary I could give the Committee additional authority. We are told that the superior is merely a creditor or a heritable creditor. Does the right hon. Member for Hillhead and do those of his colleagues who make a statement of that kind realise that by force of Statute it is a statutory condition of every feu that if a feu duty remains unpaid for two whole years together the vassal forfeits his right to the land? It is no use the right hon. Member for Stamford (Sir A. Steel-Maitland) displaying his ignorance by saying that a mortgage is the same thing. I would suggest that the right hon. Gentleman might pursue his studies in this matter a little further. He said "mortgagee." he now wants to change it to "mortgagor."
I have no doubt it may be said that while theoretically the superior is a landowner, that is a merely theoretical point and that practically he is in the position of a creditor. It is not a mere theoretical point. To begin with the title of a superior is a title to the lands themselves. There is one very far reaching consequence which follows from that. Does the right hon. Member for Hillhead realise that a superior upon his title, upon his superiority title, can prescribe a right to the lands themselves and that that is well established in our law and that it has had most far reaching repercussions on the land interests of Scotland? Most of the land or a great part of the land in Scotland is held upon general titles; that is to say, the land is not held or occupied by reference to boundaries or to other forms of measurement. It is held under general names—it might be the "lands of Hillhead "—under territorial designations. What has been the result of that? Superiors possessing upon titles containing mere general descriptions have acquired rights to land for which they had never paid one single penny. As the right hon. Gentleman is well aware, nine-tenths of the foreshore of Scotland has been annexed by the landowners in that way. It is in defence of those great, powerful, intensely selfish landed interests—[Interruption]. I knew that that shot
would get home—that the opposition to these Clauses is based.
Let me just say a word upon the position of the ground annual. That is not exactly the same as the position of the feu. It is quite true that the privileges and rights of the owner of a ground annual are not so extensive as those of a superior, but in working out the problem which we have to work out in Scotland, we must get as much uniformity as we can in the application of the tax. The right hon. Gentleman is well aware that a ground annual is in essence just a feu duty, and the reason why we have got ground annuals at all is this, that the landowners of Scotland, of whoso virtues we have heard so much to-night from hon. Members opposite, when they feued the land, put into those feus prohibitions against sub-feuing. It was because there were prohibitions against sub-feuing that you came to have the ground annual in Scotland, but in essence a ground annual is simply a feu duty.
I want briefly now to ask hon. Members opposite to face up to this question. Parliament has said that we are going to have a laud tax. Who is going to pay the tax? You have to make up your minds on this issue. When you come to Scotland, there are only two alternatives. This tax which Parliament has said is to be imposed has to be paid either by the vassal or by the superior. There is no other alternative. The view that the Government take is this, that while the tax is chargeable upon the vassal in the first instance, under the provisions of this Bill, it is right that the vassal should be given a right of relief against the superior for the amount of the tax. Let me state the reasons why it is just that this tax should be paid by the superior and not by the vassal. Under the Bill, the tax is chargeable on the vassal to begin with, because he is in occupation, but he has, under the Clause, a right of relief against the superior, and in practice that means that he deducts it from the feu duty which he pays to the superior. That is how it works out, and I venture to say that that is right. What is the alternative to that? Is the alternative which the hon. Members opposite propose to leave the tax upon the vassal
and give him no right of relief against the superior? [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] Then what is the alternative?

Mr. MACQUISTEN: If the tax is left on the vassal, and the value of the property is increasing by reason of the preesnce of neighbours and of public utilities, surely the vassal is the man who is getting the unearned increment?

The LORD ADVOCATE: One cannot but be touched by the anxiety of hon. Members opposite in this matter. Hon. Members opposite may say "Well, do not have a tax at all." That is intelligible; it is more intelligible than most of the ideas that come from hon. Members opposite. At any rate, it has the great value of intelligibility. Parliament has said that we are to have a lax, and we say that it should be passed back to the superior. Why do we say that? If you leave the tax on the vassal, you are taxing the person who is putting the land to use. The superior no doubt enjoys the privileges of a landowner, but in so far as use of the land is concerned, a superior in Scotland is a mere receiver of rent. Accordingly, it is just that the tax should be paid by the person who is the mere receiver of rent, and that is why we propose to pass the tax on the the superior. We—

Mr. JAMES STUART: rose—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must remember that, unless the Lord Advocate gives way, he has no right to interrupt. He has no right to persist in standing upon his feet if the Member who is in possession does not give way.

Mr. STUART: I think the Lord Advocate has now given way. Can he give us any answer to the question of my hon. and learned Friend as to who gets the increment value?

The LORD ADVOCATE: I am coining to that. If you accept what I understand to be the proposal of this Amendment, you will leave the tax on the vassal. That means that you are going to tax the vassal upon the exorbitant feu duty which he has to pay to the landowner. I cannot assent to the view that the feu duties in Scotland are moderate, trifling annual exactions of no particular moment. Anyone who is familiar with the system of feu duties in Scotland knows that the action of the superior
in the matter of feu duty has been one of the greatest hindrances in the way of housing development.

Sir D. HERBERT: But who does get the increment?

HON. MEMBERS: Answer!

The LORD ADVOCATE: As I have already stated, there is great anxiety on the part of hon. Members opposite to see that the increment should not escape.

Sir D. HERBERT: But who does get it Do you know? [Interruption.]

The LORD ADVOCATE: There is this further consideration, if hon. Members will be kind enough to give me their attention. If you cannot cast the tax back upon the superior, then you are really allowing the land value to escape. After all, what is the feu duty but land value? The proposal of hon. Members opposite is that the receiver of the site value, who is the superior, is to pocket the whole site value and make no contribution to the needs of the community. [HON. MEMBERS: "Who does get it?"] May I just deal with the argument which was put forward by the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. Buchan)? The hon. Member said that the proposals in this Bill were really an attack upon trust investments. It is perfectly true that in 1884 the legislature in the Trust Act of that year said to trustees that they might put their money, if they chose, into feu duties and ground annuals. It is important to notice that, while the legislature said that, it never said that feu duties and ground annuals were to be for ever immune from Imperial taxation.
It is said that this tax involves discrimination. There is no discrimination of any kind. We are not placing the trustees who hold feu duties as an investment in a different position from owners who are not trustees and hold feu duties as an investment. There is no discrimination of any kind, and if it is suggested, as hon. Members seem to suggest, that because money is invested in trust therefore it should be immune from Imperial taxation, I venture to say that I think hon. Members on this side of the House will agree that the doctrine of the dead hand has been applied far enough in Scotland. I rather gather that the point
made by the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities was that we are discriminating within trust investments, taking only certain trust investments. I should be very glad if the hon. Member can tell me of any tax that does not discriminate. It could equally be said that if we put a tax on petrol we are discriminating, because we affect only the person who is using petrol. If we put a tax on food we should be discriminating, and it would be one of the most vicious forms of discrimination. I think the Committee must come to the conclusion that there is no foundation for the argument that there is discrimination.
Then we are told that feu duties are an investment, that purchasers have paid the full price and did not take account of possible taxation. I go back 21 years to the time of the Liberal land legislation in 1909. Everyone knows that since 1909 the market price of feu duties has taken into account a contingent liability to tax. Prior to 1900 feu duties had a market value of something like 30 years' purchase. After 1909 they fell to 15 or 16 years' purchase, and it is quite untrue to say that a purchaser has paid the full price. The price paid within the last 21 years has been a price reckoned on the basis that there was a contingent liability to tax. We have heard a great deal about trust money which is invested in feu duties. Do the Committee realise that there is far more trust money invested in land than in feu duties, and the proposal of hon. Members opposite would tax the former trusts only? That is a proposition to which we cannot assent.
The right hon. Member for Hillhead (Sir R. Home) reminded me, as he was quite entitled to do, that the Joint Legal Committee in Scotland, representing various legal societies, have expressed a view against the proposals of this Bill so far as they concern feu duties. That is perfectly true. I treat with the greatest respect anything which the Joint Legal Committee say on a matter of this sort, but it is not amiss to remember that legal societies in Scotland, as elsewhere, are notoriously conservative. I am not using the term in any party sense, but lawyers instinctively dislike change. If lawyers had their way we should still be living in the Middle Ages. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Hill-
head is well aware of that. [Interruption.] We have been told by hon. Members opposite that this tax will destroy the system of feuing in Scotland. If that were so, I should not be very much dismayed by it. What is the use of hon. Members coming down to this House and talking about the advantages and the blessings of the feuing' system in Scotland when we find congestion in our towns and cities in Scotland as the direct result of that system. To say that the system has been an advantage to the development of Scotland is a travesty of the facts.
I find that the earliest form of taxation in Scotland was a land tax, an old tax known as cess. I also find that away back over 200 years ago the superiors in Scotland endeavoured to evade their liabilities in the matter of the land tax in very much the same way as the large landed interests are trying to evade their liabilities to-day. The land tax, or cess was payable out of the feu duty. It was a tax on the value of the land, and the

superiors said, "We have not had the land value, and we should not pay the land tax." This question was decided in the Court of Session in 1602, and the Lords of Session then said that the land tax was a proper charge upon the superiors and should be paid out of the duty. [Interruption.] I quite realise that the hon. and gallant Member opposite is anxious to have a Division upon this tax, because ho and his colleagues, as was evident from their loss of temper at the beginning, realise now that the game is up.

Mr. BOOTHBY: rose—

It being half-past Ten of the Clock, the CHAIRMAN proceeded, Pursuant of the Order of the House of 4th June, to put forthwith the Question upon the Amendment already proposed from the Chair.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 257; Noes, 201.

Division No. 331.]
AYES.
[10.30 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cluse, W. S.
Hardie, G. D. (Springburn)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Harris, Percy A.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Cove, William G.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Haycock, A. W.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Daggar, George
Hayes, John Henry


Alpass, J. H.
Dallas, George
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)


Ammon, Charles George
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Angell, Sir Norman
Davies, D. L. (Pontypridd)
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Arnott, John
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Day, Harry
Herriotts, J.


Ayles, Walter
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hirst, G. H. York W. R. Wentworth)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Dukes, C.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Duncan, Charles
Hoffman, P. C.


Barnes, Alfred John
Ede, James Chuter
Hollins, A.


Barr, James
Edmunds, J. E.
Hopkin, Daniel


Batey, Joseph
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Egan, W. H.
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Elmley, Viscount
Isaacs, George


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Foot, Isaac
Jenkins, Sir William


Benson, G.
Freeman, Peter
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Johnston, Rt. Hon. Thomas


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)
Jones, Llewellyn-, F.


Bowen, J. W.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Gill, T. H.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Gillett, George M.
Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. (Preston)


Bromfield, William
Glassey, A. E.
Keliy, W. T.


Bromley, J.
Gossling, A. G.
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas


Brooke, W.
Gould, F.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Kinley, J.


Buchanan, G.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Kirkwood, D.


Burgess, F. G.
Gray, Milner
Knight, Holford


Burgin, Dr. E L.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Lang, Gordon


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks, W. R. Elland)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Caine, Hall-, Derwent
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lathan, G. (Sheffield, Park)


Cameron, A. G.
Groves, Thomas E.
Law, Albert (Bolton)


Cape, Thomas
Grundy, Thomas W.
Law, A. (Rossendale)


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lawrence, Susan


Charleton, H. C.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)


Chater, Daniel
Half, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Lawson, John James


Church, Major A. G.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Lawther W. (Barnard Castle)


Clarke, J. S.
Hardie, David (Rutherglen)
Leach, W.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Noel-Buxton, Baronets (Norfolk, N.)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Lees, J.
Oldfield, J. R
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Leonard, W.
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Sorensen, R.


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Palin, John Henry.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Paling, Wilfrid
Stephen, Campbell


Logan, David Gilbert
Palmer, E. T.
Strauss, G. R.


Longbottom, A. W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Sullivan, J.


Longden, F.
Perry, S. F.
Sutton, J. E.


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Lunn, William
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Pole, Major D. G.
Thurtle, Ernest


McElwee, A.
Potts, John S.
Tillett, Ben


McEntee, V. L.
Price, M. P.
Tinker, John Joseph


McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Quibell, D. J. K.
Toole, Joseph


MacLaren, Andrew
Rathbone, Eleanor
Tout, W. J.


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Raynes, W. R.
Townend, A. E.


McShane, John James
Richards, R.
Vaughan, David


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Viant, S. P.


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Ritson, J.
Walkden, A. G.


Manning, E. L.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Walker, J.


Mansfield, W.
Romerll, H. G.
Watkins, F. C.


March, S.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Marcus, M.
Rowson, Guy
Wellock, Wilfred


Markham, S. F.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Marley, J.
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Westwood, Joseph


Marshall, Fred
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Mathers, George
Sanders, W. S.
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Matters, L. W.
Sandham, E
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Maxton, James
Sawyer, G. F.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Messer, Fred
Sexton, Sir James
Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)


Middleton, G.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Mills, J. E.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Milner, Major J.
Sherwood, G. H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Montague, Frederick
Shield, George William
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Shillaker, J. F.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Morley, Ralph
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Simmons, C. J.
Wise, E. F.


Mort. D. L.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Muff, G.
Sinkinson, George
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Muggeridge, H. T.
Sitch, Charles H.



Murnin, Hugh
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Nathan, Major H. L.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. B.


Naylor, T. E.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Smith.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s. M.)


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Everard, W. Lindsay


Albery, Irving James
Cayzor, Maj. Sir Herbt, R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.)
Ferguson, Sir John


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Fielden, E. B.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Ford, Sir P. J.


Aske, Sir Robert
Chapman, Sir S.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Christie, J. A.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Astor, Viscountess
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Atholl, Duchess of
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Ganzonl, Sir John


Atkinson, C.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton


Balllie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Colfox, Major William Philip
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Colville, Major D. J.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Gower, Sir Robert


Balniel, Lord
Cooper, A. Duff
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Beaumont, M. W.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Cowan, D. M.
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Cranborne, Viscount
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)


Boyce, Leslie
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Hanbury, C.


Bracken, B.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Brass, Captain Sir William
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Hartington, Marquess of


Broadbent, Colonel J.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Buchan, John
Dixey, A. C.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J


Butler, R. A.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G


Campbell, E. T.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Carver, Major W. H.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.




Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Hurd, Percy A.
O'Neill, Sir H.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Inskip, Sir Thomas
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Stanley, Hon. O. (Westmorland)


Iveagh, Countess of
Penny, Sir George
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Perkins, W. R. D.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)


Kindersley, Major G. M.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Latham, H. P. (Scarboro' & Whitby)
Pybus, Percy John
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Thompson, Luke


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Ramsbotham, H.
Thomson, Mitchell., Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Held, David D. (County Down)
Train, J.


Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Remer, John R.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Lockwood, Captain J. H.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Long, Major Hon. Eric
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch't'sy)
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Macquisten, F. A.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Ross, Ronald D.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Margesson, Captain H. D.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wells, Sydney R.


Marjoribanks, Edward
Salmon, Major I.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Milne, Wardlaw-, J. S.
Savery, S. S.
Withers, Sir John James


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Womersley, W. J.


Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Skelton, A. N.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Muirhead, A. J.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)



Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Smithers, Waldron
Sir Frederick Thomson and Sir


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Victor Warrender.


O'Connor, T. J.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)

The CHAIRMAN then proceeded successively to put forthwith the Questions on any Amendments moved by the Government of which notice had been given, and the Questions necessary to dispose of the business to be concluded, at this day's Sitting.

Amendment proposed: In page 31, line 37, after the word "paragraph," to insert the words:
or under Section fifteen of this Act."—[Mr. William Graham.]

Question put, "That the Amendment be made."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 259; Noes, 194.

Division No. 332.]
AYES.
[10.42 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cameron, A. G.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Cape, Thomas
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Gray, Milner


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Charleton, H. C.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Coins).


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Chater, Daniel
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Alpass, J. H.
Church, Major A. G.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Ammon, Charles George
Clarke, J. S.
Groves, Thomas E.


Angell, Sir Norman
Cluse, W. S.
Grundy, Thomas W.


Arnott, John
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Aske, Sir Robert
Cove, William G.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)


Ayles, Walter
Daggar, George
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Dallas, George
Hardie, David (Rutherglen)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Hardie, G. D. (Springburn)


Barnes, Alfred John
Davies, D. L. (Pontypridd)
Harris, Percy A.


Barr, James
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Batey, Joseph
Day, Harry
Haycock, A. W.


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Denman, Hon. R. D
Hayes, John Henry


Denn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Dukes, C.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Duncan, Charles
Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Benson, G.
Ede, James Chuter
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Edmunds, J. E.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Herriotts, J.


Bowen, J. W.
Egan, W. H.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Elmley, Viscount
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Foot, Isaac
Hoffman, P. C.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Freeman, Peter
Hollins, A.


Bromfield, William
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Hopkin, Daniel


Bromley, J.
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Brooke, W.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Buchanan, G.
Gill, T. H.
Isaacs, George


Burgess, F. G.
Gillett, George M.
Jenkins, Sir William


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Glassey, A. E.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks, W. R. Elland)
Gossling, A. G.
Johnston, Rt. Hon. Thomas


Caine, Hall-, Derwent
Gould, F.
Jones, Llewellyn-, F.


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Middleton, G.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Mills, J. E.
Sinkinson, George


Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. (Preston)
Milner, Major J.
Sitch, Charles H.


Kelly, W. T.
Montague, Frederick
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Morley, Ralph
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Kinley, J.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Kirkwood, D.
Mort, D. L.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Knight, Holford
Muff, G.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Lang, Gordon
Muggeridge, H. T.
Sorensen, R.


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Murnin, Hugh
Stamford, Thomas W.


Lathan, G. (Sheffield, Park)
Nathan, Major H. L.
Stephen, Campbell


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Naylor, T. E.
Strauss, G. R.


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Sullivan, J.


Lawrence, Susan
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Sutton, J. E


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Oldfield, J. R.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Lawson, John James
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Palin, John Henry
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Leach, W.
Paling, Wilfrid
Thurtle, Ernest


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Palmer, E. T.
Tillett, Ben


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Tinker, John Joseph


Lees, J.
Perry, S. F.
Toole, Joseph


Leonard, W.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Tout, W. J.


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Townend, A. E.


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Vaughan, David


Logan, David Gilbert
Pole, Major D. G.
Viant, S. P.


Longbottom, A. W.
Potts, John S.
Walkden, A. G.


Longden, F.
Price, M. P.
Walker, J.


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Quibell, D. J. K.
Watkins, F. C.


Lunn, William
Rathbone, Eleanor
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Raynes, W. R.
Wellock, Wilfred


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Richards, R.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


McElwee, A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Westwood, Joseph


McEntee, V. L.
Ritson, J.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


MacLaren, Andrew
Romerll, H. G.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Rowson, Guy
Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)


McShane, John James
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, Went)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Manning, E. L.
Sanders, W. S.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Mansfield, W.
Sandham, E.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


March, S.
Sawyer, G. F.
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Marcus, M.
Sexton, Sir James
Wise, E. F.


Markham, S. F.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Marley, J.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Marshall, Fred
Sherwood, G. H.



Mathers, George
Shield, George William
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Matters, L. W.
Shillaker, J. F.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Maxton, James
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
B. Smith.


Messer, Fred
Simmons, C. J.



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Butler, R. A.
Dawson, Sir Philip


Albery, Irving James
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Campbell, E. T.
Dixey, A. C.


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Carver, Major W. H.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Eden, Captain Anthony


Astor, Viscountess
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt, R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Atholl, Duchess of
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Elliot, Major Walter E.


Atkinson, C.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)


Balllie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Chapman, Sir S.
Everard, W. Lindsay


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Christie, J. A.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Ferguson, Sir John


Balniel, Lord
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Fielden, E. B.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Colfox, Major William Philip
Ford, Sir P. J.


Beaumont, M. W.
Colvllie, Major D. J.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Cooper, A. Duff
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Ganzonl, Sir John


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton


Bird, Ernest Roy
Cowan, D. M.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Boothby, R. J. G.
Cranborne, Viscount
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Gower, Sir Robert


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Boyce, Leslie
Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Bracken, B.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter


Brass, Captain Sir William
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Greene W. P. Crawford


Broadbent, Colonel J.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Buchan, John
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.




Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Smithers, Waldron


Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hanbury, C.
Muirhead, A. J.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Hartington, Marquess of
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Henderson, Capt. R. B (Oxf'd, Henley)
O'Connor, T. J.
Stanley, Hon. O. (Westmorland)


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
O'Neill, Sir H.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast South)


Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Hoare, Lt. Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Perkins, W. R. D.
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Thompson, Luke


Hurd, Percy A.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Thomson, Mitchell-, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Pybus, Percy John
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Inskip, Sir Thomas
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Train, J.


Iveagh, Countess of
Ramsbotham, H.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Kindersley, Major G. M.
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Remer, John R.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Latham, H. P. (Scarboro' & Whitby)
Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Warrender, Sir Victor


Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Wayland, Sir William A.


Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Wells, Sydney R.


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Ross, Ronald D.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Lockwood, Captain J. H.
Salmon, Major I.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Long, Major Hon. Eric
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Withers, Sir John James


Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Macquisten, F. A.
Savery, S. S.
Womersley, W. J.


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Margesson, Captain H. D.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome



Marjoribanks, Edward
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Skelton, A. N.
Sir Frederick Thomson and Sir


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.
George Penny.


Milne, Wardlaw-, J. S.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.

Further Amendments made: In page 32, line 12, leave out "(4)" and insert "(5)."

In line 28 leave out the word "of" and insert the word "exceeding."—[Mr. W. Graham.]

Amendment proposed: In line 32 leave out the word "twenty-three" and insert instead thereof the word "twenty-one."—[Mr. W. Graham.]

Question put, "That the Amendment be made."

The Committee proceeded to a Division—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: On three or four occasions during the last 10 minutes I have heard whistling. I wish to say, quite definitely, that the Member who is doing that ought be ashamed of himself, and, if I discover who it is, I shall ask him to retire from the Committee.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 258; Noes, 190.

Division No. 333.]
AYES.
[10.54 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Bromfield, William
Dudgeon, Major C. R.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Bromley, J.
Dukes, C.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Brooke, W.
Duncan, Charles


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Ede, James Chuter


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Buchanan, G.
Edmunds, J. E.


Alpass, J. H.
Burgess, F. G.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)


Ammon, Charles George
Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)


Angell, Sir Norman
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks, W. R. Elland)
Egan, W. H.


Arnott, John
Caine, Hall-, Derwent
Elmley, Viscount


Aske, Sir Robert
Cameron, A. G.
Foot, Isaac


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cape, Thomas
Freeman, peter


Ayles, Walter
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Charleton, H. C.
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)


Barnes, Alfred John
Chater, Daniel
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)


Barr, James
Church, Major A. G.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)


Batey, Joseph
Clarke, J. S.
Gill, T. H.


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Cluse, W. S.
Gillett, George M.


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Glassey, A. E.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Cove, William G.
Gossling, A. G.


Benton, G.
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Gould, F.


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Daggar, George
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Dallas, George
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)


Bowen, J. W.
Davies, D. L. (Pontypridd)
Gray, Milner


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Day, Harry
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Griffiths. T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Groves, Thomas E.
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)


Grundy, Thomas W.
McElwee, A.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
McEntee, V. L.
Sanders, W. S.


Hell, J. H. (Whitechapel)
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Sandham, E.


Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
MacLaren, Andrew
Sawyer, G. F.


Hamilton, Sir R (Orkney & Zetland)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Sexton, Sir James


Hardie, David (Rutherglen)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Hardie, G. D. (Springburn)
McShane, John James
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Harris, Percy A.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Sherwood, G. H.


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Shield, George William


Haycock, A. W.
Manning, E. L.
Shillaker, J. F.


Hayes, John Henry
Mansfield, W.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
March, S.
Simmons, C. J.


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Marcus, M.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Markham, S. F.
Sinkinson, George


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Marley, J.
Sitch, Charles H.


Herriotts, J.
Marshall, Fred
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Mathers, George
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Matters, L. W.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Hoffman, P. C.
Maxton, James
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Hollins, A.
Messer, Fred
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Hopkin, Daniel
Middleton, G.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Hore-Belisha, Leslie.
Mills, J. E.
Sorensen, R.


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Milner, Major J.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Montague, Frederick
Stephen, Campbell


Isaacs, George
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Strauss, G. R.


Jenkins, Sir William
Morley, Ralph
Sullivan, J.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Sutton, J. E.


Johnston, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Mort, D. L.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Jones, Llewellyn-, F.
Muff, G.
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Muggeridge, H. T.
Tillett, Ben


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Murnin, Hugh
Tinker, John Joseph


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Nathan, Major H. L.
Toole, Joseph


Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. (Preston)
Naylor, T. E.
Tout, W. J.


Kelly, W. T.
Noel Baker, P. J.
Townend, A. E.


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Vaughan, David


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Oldfield, J. R.
Viant, S. P.


Kinley, J.
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Walkden, A. G.


Kirkwood, D.
Palin, John Henry
Walker, J.


Lang, Gordon
Paling, Wilfrid
Watkins, F. C.


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Palmer, E. T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Lathan, G. (Sheffield, Park)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wellock, Wilfred


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Perry, S. F.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Westwood, Joseph


Lawrence, Susan
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Lawson, John James
Pole, Major D. G.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Potts, John S.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Leach, W.
Price, M. P.
Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Quibell, D. J. K.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Lees, J.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Leonard, W.
Raynes, W. R.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Richards, R.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Logan, David Gilbert
Ritson, J.
Wise, E. F.


Longbottom, A. W.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Longden, F.
Romerll, H. G.
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.



Lunn, William
Rowson, Guy
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Mr. B. Smith and Mr. Thurtle.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Boothby, R. J. G.
Clydesdale, Marquess of


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Albery, Irving James
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Boyce, Leslie
Colfox, Major William Philip


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Bracken, B.
Colville, Major D. J.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Brass, Captain Sir William
Conway, Sir W. Martin


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Broadbent, Colonel J.
Cooper, A. Duff


Astor, Viscountess
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Courtauld, Major J. S.


Atholl, Duchess of
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.


Atkinson, C.
Buchan, John
Cranborne, Viscount


Balllie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Butler, R. A.
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Campbell, E. T.
Crookshank, Capt. H. C.


Balniel, Lord
Carver, Major W. H.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)


Beaumont, M. W.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Dalkeith, Earl of


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Chapman, Sir S.
Dawson, Sir Philip


Bird, Ernest Roy
Christie, J. A.
Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.




Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Jones, Sir G W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Salmon, Major I.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Elliot, Major Walter E
Latham, H. P. (Scarboro' & Whitby)
Savery, S. S.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Ferguson, Sir John
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Skelton, A. N.


Fielden, E. B.
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Ford, Sir P. J.
Lockwood, Captain J. H.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Long, Major Hon. Eric
Smithers, Waldron


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Ganzonl, Sir John
Macquisten, F. A.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Marjoribanks, Edward
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Gower, Sir Robert
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Stanley, Hon. O. (Westmorland)


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Milne, Wardlaw-, J. S.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)


Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Muirhead, A. J.
Thomas, Major L. S. (King's Norton)


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Thompson, Luke


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Thomson, Sir F.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Thomson, Mitchell-, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
O'Connor, T. J.
Train, J.


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
O'Neill, Sir H.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Hanbury, C.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Hartington, Marquess of
Perkins, W. R. D.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Wayland, Sir William A.


Heneage, Lieut. Colonel Arthur P.
Pybus, Percy John
Wells, Sydney R.


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J
Ramsbotham, H.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Remer, John R.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch't'sy)
Womersley, W. J.


Hurd, Percy A.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell



Inskip, Sir Thomas
Ross, Ronald D.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Iveagh, Countess of
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Sir George Penny and Major the




Marquess of Titchfield.

Amendment proposed: In page 32, line 35, at the end, to insert the words:
(t) in the foregoing provisions of this section references to a feu contract, a superior, a feuar, and a feu duty shall be deemed to include, respectively, references to a contract of ground annual, a creditor

therein, a debtor there in, and a ground annual."—[Mr. W. Graham.]

Question put, "That the Amendment be made."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 261; Noes, 187.

Division No. 334.]
AYES.
[11.4 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Bromfield, William
Dudgeon, Major C. R.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Bromley, J.
Dukes, C.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Brooke, W.
Duncan, Charles


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Ede, James Chuter


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Buchanan, G.
Edmunds, J. E.


Alpass, J. H.
Burgess, F. G.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)


Ammon, Charles George
Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)


Angell, Sir Norman
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Egan, W. H.


Arnott, John
Caine, Hall-, Derwent
Elmley, Viscount


Aske, Sir Robert
Cameron, A. G.
Foot, Isaac


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cape, Thomas
Freeman, Peter


Ayles, Walter
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Charleton, H. C.
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Chater, Daniel
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)


Barnes, Alfred John
Church, Major A. G.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)


Barr, James
Clarke, J. S.
Gill, T. H.


Batey, Joseph
Cluse, W. S.
Gillett, George M.


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Glassey, A. E.


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Cove, William G.
Gossling, A. G.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Gould, F.


Benson, G.
Daagar, George
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Dallas, George
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm, (Edin., Cent.)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Gray, Milner


Bowen, J. W.
Davies, D. L. (Pontypridd)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Day, Harry
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Groves, Thomas E.


Grundy, Thomas W.
McEntee, V. L.
Sanders, W. S.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Snettleston)
Sandham, E.


Hall, J. H (Whitechapel)
MacLaren, Andrew
Sawyer, G. F.


Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Sexton, Sir James


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Hardie, David (Rutherglen)
McShane, John James
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Hardie, G. D. (Springburn)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Harris, Percy A.
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Sherwood, G. H.


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Manning, E. L.
Shield, George William


Haycock, A. W.
Mansfield, W.
Shillaker, J. F.


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
March, S.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Marcus, M.
Simmons, C. J.


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Markham, S. F.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Marley, J.
Sinkinson, George


Herriotts, J.
Marshall, Fred
Sitch, Charles H


Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Mathers, George
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Matters, L. W.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Hoffman, P. C.
Maxton, James
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Hollins, A.
Messer, Fred
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Hopkin, Daniel
Middleton, G.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Mills, J. E.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Milner, Major J.
Sorensen, R.


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Montague, Frederick
Stamford, Thomas W.


Isaacs, George
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Stephen, Campbell


Jenkins, Sir William
Morley, Ralph
Strauss, G. R.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Sullivan, J.


Johnston, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Mort, D. L.
Sutton, J. E.


Jones, Llewellyn-, F.
Muff, G.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Muggeridge, H. T.
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Murnin, Hugh
Thurtle, Ernest


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Nathan, Major H. L.
Tillett, Ben


Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. (Preston)
Naylor, T. E.
Tinker, John Joseph


Kelly, W. T.
Noel Baker, P. J.
Toole, Joseph


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Tout, W. J.


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Oldfield, J. R.
Townend, A. E.


Kinley, J.
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Vaughan, David


Kirkwood, D.
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Viant, S. P.


Lang, Gordon
Palin, John Henry
Walkden, A. G.


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Palmer, E. T.
Walker, J.


Lathan, G. (Sheffield, Park)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wallace, H. W.


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Perry, S. F.
Watkins, F. C.


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Lawrence, Susan
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Wellock, Wilfred


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Lawson, John James
Pole, Major D. G.
Westwood, Joseph


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Potts, John S.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Leach, W.
Price, M. P.
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


Lee Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Quibell, D. J. K.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Lees, J.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)


Leonard, W.
Raynes, W. R.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Richards, R.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Logan, David Gilbert
Ritson, J.
Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)


Longbottom, A. W.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Longden, F.
Romerll, H. G.
Wise, E. F.


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Lunn, William
Rowson, Guy
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Salter, Dr. Alfred



MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


McElwee, A.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Mr. Hayes and Mr. Paling.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut. Colonel
Boothby, R. J. G.
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George


Albery, Irving James
Boyce, Leslie
Colfox, Major William Philip


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Bracken, B.
Colville, Major D. J.


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Brass, Captain Sir William
Conway, Sir W. Martin


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Broadbent, Colonel J.
Cooper, A. Duff


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Courtauld, Major J. S.


Astor, Viscountess
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.


Atkinson, C.
Sutler, R. A.
Cranborne, Viscount


Balllie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Campbell, E. T.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Carver, Major W. H.
Crookshank, Capt. H. C.


Balniel, Lord
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)


Beaumont, M. W.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Dalkeith, Earl of


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Chapman, Sir S.
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Christie, J. A.
Dawson, Sir Philip


Bird, Ernest Roy
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.




Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Savery, S. S.


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Latham, H. P. (Scarboro' & Whitby)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston s-M.)
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Everard, W. Lindsay
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Skelton, A. N.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Ferguson, Sir John
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Fielden, E. B.
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Smithers, Waldron


Ford, Sir P. J.
Lockwood, Captain J. H.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Long, Major Hon. Eric
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Macquisten, F. A.
Spender-Clay. Colonel H.


Ganzonl, Sir John
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Stanley, Hon. O. (Westmorland)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Marjoribanks, Edward
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)


Gower, Sir Robert
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Milne, Wardlaw-, J. S.
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Thompson, Luke


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Muirhead, A. J.
Thomson, Sir F.


Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Thomson, Mitchell-, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Train, J.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
O'Connor, T. J.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
O'Neill, Sir H.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. Willlam
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Hanbury, C.
Peake, Capt Osbert
Warrender, Sir Victor


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Perkins, W. R. D.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hartington, Marquess of
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Wayland, Sir William A.


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Wells, Sydney R.


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Pybus, Percy John
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Ramsbotham, H.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Remer, John R.
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Womersley, W. J.


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Hudson, Capt A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)



Hurd, Percy A.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Ross, Ronald D.
Sir George Bowyer and Sir George


Inskip, Sir Thomas
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Penny.


Iveagh, Countess of
Salmon, Major I.

Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 257; Noes, 185.

Division No. 335.]
AYES.
[11.13 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Burgin, Dr. E. L.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Caine, Hall-, Derwent
Gill, T. H.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Cameron, A. G.
Gillett, George M.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Glassey, A. E.


Alpass, J. H.
Charleton, H. C.
Gossling, A. G.


Ammon, Charles George
Chater, Daniel
Gould, F.


Angell, Sir Norman
Church, Major A. G.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Arnott, John
Clarke, J. S.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)


Aske, Sir Robert
Cluse, W. S.
Gray, Milner


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cocks, Frederick Seymour.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)


Ayles, Walter
Cove, William G.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Daggar, George
Groves, Thomas E.


Barnes, Alfred John
Dallas, George
Grundy, Thomas W.


Barr, James
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Batey, Joseph
Davies, D. L. (Pontypridd)
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)


Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood
Day, Harry
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Denman, Hon. R. D.
Hardie, David (Rutherglen)


Benson, G.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hardie, G. D. (Springburn)


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Dukes, C.
Harris, Percy A.


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Duncan, Charles
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Bowen, J. W.
Ede, James Chuter
Haycock, A. W.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Edmunds, J. E.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)


Broad, Francis Alfred
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Bromfield, William
Egan, W. H.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Bromley, J.
Elmley, Viscount
Herriotts, J.


Brooke, W.
Foot, Isaac
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Freeman, Peter
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Buchanan, G.
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Hoffman, P. C.


Burgess, F. G.
Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)
Hollins, A.


Hopkin, Daniel
Marley, J.
Sherwood, G. H.


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Marshall, Fred
Shield, George William


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Mathers, George
Shillaker, J. F.


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Matters, L. W.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Isaacs, George
Maxton, James
Simmons, C. J.


Jenkins, Sir William
Messer, Fred
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Middleton, G.
Sinkinson, George


Jones, Llewellyn-, F.
Mills, J. E.
Sitch, Charles H.


Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Milner, Major J.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Montague, Frederick
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A. (Preston)
Morley, Ralph
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Kelly, W. T.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Mort, D. L.
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Muff, G.
Sorensen, R.


Kinley, J.
Muggeridge, H. T.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Kirkwood, D.
Murnin, Hugh
Stephen, Campbell


Lang, Gordon
Nathan, Major H. L
Strauss, G. R.


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Naylor, T. E.
Sullivan, J.


Lathan, G. (Sheffield, Park)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Sutton, J. E.


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Law, A. (Rosendale)
Oldfield, J. R.
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S. W.)


Lawrence, Susan
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Thurtle, Ernest


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Tillett, Ben


Lawson, John James
Palin, John Henry
Tinker, John Joseph


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Palmer, E. T.
Toole, Joseph


Leach, W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Tout, W. J.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)
Perry, S. F.
Townend, A. E


Lee; Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Vaughan, David


Lees, J.
Phillips, Dr. Marion
Viant, S. P.


Leonard, W.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Walkden, A. G.


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Pole, Major D. G.
Wallace, H. W.


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Potts, John S.
Watkins, F. C.


Lagan, David Gilbert
Price, M. P.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Longbottom, A. W.
Quibell, D. J. K.
Wellock, Wilfred


Longden, F.
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Westwood, Joseph


Lunn, William
Raynes, W. R.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Richards, R.
Whiteley, William (Blaydon)


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


McElwee, A.
Ritson, J.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


McEntee, V. L.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)


McGovern, J. (Glasgow, Shettleston)
Romerll, H. G.
Williams Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


MacLaren, Andrew
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Rowson, Guy
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


McShane, John James
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Wise, E. F.


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Sanders, W. S.
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Manning, E. L.
Sandham, E.
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Mansfield, W.
Sawyer, G. F.



March, S.
Sexton, Sir James
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Marcus, M.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Mr. Hayes and Mr. Paling.


Markham, S. F.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Croom-Johnson, R. P.


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)


Albery, Irving James
Buchan, John
Dalkeith, Earl of


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Butler, R. A.
Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)


Astor, Maj. Hon. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Campbell, E. T.
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)


Astor, Viscountess
Carver, Major W. H.
Dawson, Sir Philip


Atholl, Duchess of
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F.


Atkinson, C.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.


Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Eden, Captain Anthony


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Chamberlain Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Elliot, Major Walter E.


Balniel, Lord
Chapman, Sir S.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Christie, J. A.
Everard, W. Lindsay


Beaumont, M. W.
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Ferguson, Sir John


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Fielden, E. B.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Colfox, Major William Philip
Ford, Sir P. J.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Colville, Major D. J.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Cooper, A. Duff
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Ganzonl, Sir John


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton


Boyce, Leslie
Cranborne, Viscount
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Bracken, B.
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Gower, Sir Robert


Broadbent, Colonel J.
Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)




Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Skelton, A. N.


Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Marjoribanks, Edward
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.
Smithers, Waldron


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Milne, Wardlaw-, J. S.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Muirhead, A. J.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Hanbury, C.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Stanley, Hon. O. (Westmorland)


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Hartington, Marquess of
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld)
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
O'Connor, T. J.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
O'Neill, Sir H.
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Thompson, Luke


Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)
Peaks, Captain Osbert
Thomson, Mitchell-, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Perkins, W. R. D.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Train, J.


Hurd, Percy A.
Power, Sir John Cecil
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hutchison, Maj,-Gen. Sir R.
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon


Inskip, Sir Thomas
Pybus, Percy John
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Iveagh, Countess of
Ramsbotham, H.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Kindersley, Major G. M.
Remer, John R.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Wayland, Sir William A.


Latham, H. P. (Scarboro' & Whitby)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Surly, Ch'te'y)
Wells, Sydney R.


Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Ross, Ronald D.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Salmon, Major I.
Womersley, W. J.


Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Lockwood, Captain J. H.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart



Long, Major Hon. Eric
Savery, S. S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Sir Frederick Thomson and Sir




George Penny.


Question put, and agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—[Mr. T. Kennedy.]

Sir R. HORNE: rose——

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: Does the right hon. Gentleman rise to a point of Order.

Sir R. HORNE: I rise to a point of Order. I wish to direct attention to the way in which the Debate was conducted throughout the proceedings to-day.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The Motion to report Progress is not one that can be debated, because we have not reached the end of the business set down for this allotted period. The motion to report Progress cannot be debated until the business set down for that day has been completed under the Guillotine motion. The motion to-night must be put forthwith.

Committee accordingly report Progress; to sit again upon Tuesday next.

FINANCE [ADVANCE TO ROAD FUND].

Resolution reported,
That, for the purpose of any Act of the present Session relating to finance, it is expedient—

(i) to authorise the Treasury at any time within the current financial year to advance to the Road Fund out of the Consolidated Fund (in addition to any advances made to the Road Fund under section twenty-seven of the Finance Act, 1928), such further sums, not exceeding in the aggregate nine million pounds, as may be required for the purpose of making any payments falling to be made out of the Road Fund on account of expenditure incurred in respect of the construction or improvement of roads within the meaning of the Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909, which cannot be met out of the income of that Fund, and to provide for the repayment to the Exchequer out of the Road Fund of any sums so advanced together with interest thereon;
(ii) to authorise the Treasury to borrow by means of terminable annuities for a term not exceeding nine years or by the issue of other securities (being securities repayable not later than the thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and forty-one) for the purpose of providing money for the issue of sums out of the Consolidated Fund as aforesaid or for the repayment to that fund of all or any part of any sum so issued or for paying off any securities issued as aforesaid;
(iii) to provide for the payment out of the Consolidated Fund of any terminable annuities granted, and the principal of and interest on any securities issued, under this Resolution."

MR. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 4th June, put forth-with the Question necessary to dispose of the Resolution.

FINANCE [CURRENCY OF SAVINGS CERTIFCATES].

Resolution reported,
That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session relating to finance, it is expedient to authorise the Treasury to prolong the currency of savings certificates.

MR. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the Rouse of the 4th June, put forthwith the Question necessary to dispose of the Resolution.

GAS UNDERTAKINGS ACTS, 1920 AND 1929.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application of the Pontardulais Gas Company (1930), Limited, which was presented on the 13th day of May and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application of the Brighton and Hove General Gas Company, which was presented on the 21st day of May and published, be approved."—[Mr. W. R. Smith.]

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application or the Portsmouth Gas Company, which was presented on the
21st day of May and published, be approved."—[Mr. W. R. Smith.]

Major COLFOX: I should like to ask the Minister in charge what is the reason why this particular Order is brought in, what has made it necessary, and, if he can, to give us something of the history which has led up to it.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. W. R. Smith): The answer to the hon. and gallant Member's question is very simple. The history of the case really means that the growth of the undertaking has necessitated additional works being erected upon their existing land, and it is necessary to have this Order in order to enable them to carry out that development.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application of the Portsmouth Gas Company, which was presented on the 21st day of May and published, be approved.

NORTH KILLINGHOLME (ADMIRALTY PIER) BILL.

Ordered,
That Mr. Alpass, Mr. Blindell, and Commander South by be nominated Members of the Select Committee on the North Killingholme (Admiralty Pier) Bill."—[Mr. T. Kennedy.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

It being half-past Eleven of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.